## Facts

- Kathy Hauer suffered a serious brain injury in 1987, was adjudicated incompetent, and had a guardian appointed; the guardianship ended in 1988 after a physician opined she could manage her affairs.
- After the injury, Hauer’s monthly income was about $900, largely dependent on interest from a mutual fund valued around $80,000.
- Union State Bank previously loaned money to Ben Eilbes for a business; after the bank refused additional credit, Eilbes defaulted by mid-1989.
- Eilbes learned of Hauer’s mutual fund and proposed that she facilitate funding for his business through a short-term bank loan secured by her mutual fund, promising repayment and other benefits.
- Eilbes contacted a bank assistant vice-president, stating Hauer wanted to invest and could provide sufficient collateral; some proceeds would address Eilbes’s defaulted obligation to the bank.
- The bank verified the existence of the mutual fund through Hauer’s financial consultant, who warned that the fund income was Hauer’s primary support and advised against using it as collateral; evidence also supported that the bank had indicators of Hauer’s cognitive impairment.
- On October 26, 1989, the bank made a $30,000 loan to Hauer secured by her mutual fund; Hauer testified she believed she was co-signing for Eilbes and did not understand she was the principal borrower or that her fund was at risk.
- The proceeds went to Eilbes’s business and Hauer lost the amount funded.

## Issues

1. Whether credible evidence supported the jury’s finding that Hauer lacked mental capacity to enter the loan agreement.
2. Whether credible evidence supported the jury’s finding that the bank failed to act in good faith in making the loan.
3. Whether the remedies were proper, including voiding the loan, requiring return of the collateral, denying the bank repayment, and denying Hauer punitive damages and attorney’s fees.

## Decision

- The court affirmed the judgment voiding the loan and requiring the bank to return Hauer’s collateral.
- The court affirmed dismissal of the bank’s counterclaim for repayment of the loan proceeds.
- The court affirmed the denial of punitive damages and attorney’s fees to Hauer.
- The court held there was credible evidence supporting the jury’s findings of Hauer’s incompetence at contracting and the bank’s lack of good faith, and the resulting allocation of loss to the bank.

## Legal Principles

- Adults are presumed competent, but mental incompetence is shown when a person lacks the ability to understand the nature and consequences of the transaction at the time of contracting.
- A contract entered by a mentally incompetent person is voidable at that person’s option.
- When the other party has actual or constructive notice of the incompetence, that party bears the risk of the contract’s avoidance and may be denied restoration to the status quo where restitution is not feasible.
- A lender’s duty of good faith can require further inquiry when circumstances present warning signs about a borrower’s capacity and the transaction threatens the borrower’s essential means of support.
- Punitive damages and attorney’s fees require a separate legal basis beyond findings supporting avoidance and lack of good faith in contract enforcement.

## Conclusion

The court upheld avoidance of a loan secured by an incapacitated borrower’s primary asset, concluding that credible evidence supported findings of incapacity and the bank’s lack of good faith in proceeding despite warning signs; as a result, the bank was required to return the collateral and was denied repayment, while additional relief in punitive damages and fees was properly rejected.


Hauer v. Union State Bank of Wautoma, 192 Wis. 2d 576, 532 N.W.2d 456 (Ct. App. 1995)