Facts
- A landlord leased an Omaha apartment to two tenants under a written lease requiring monthly rent, a security deposit, seasonal utility payments, and late-fee liquidated damages.
- Both tenants were minors when the lease was executed, and the landlord knew of their minority at contracting.
- The tenants paid the security deposit and initial rent but failed to pay the next month’s rent.
- After the landlord demanded payment, the tenants vacated the apartment within weeks of moving in.
- The tenants had the option to return to their parents’ homes and were not without alternative shelter.
- The landlord demanded damages for unpaid rent and other charges; the tenants denied liability based on minority.
Issues
- Whether the apartment lease was a contract for “necessaries” such that the minor tenants could be held liable despite minority.
- Whether the tenants effectively disaffirmed the lease, and the legal effect of disaffirmance on liability for unpaid rent and related charges.
- Whether the tenant who reached the age of majority ratified the lease by conduct after attaining majority.
- Whether alleged emancipation affected the tenants’ contractual liability for the lease.
Decision
- The court reversed the district court’s judgment and remanded with directions to enter judgment for the tenants.
- The lease was not for “necessaries” because the tenants had available parental housing and the apartment was not required for their maintenance.
- The lease was voidable at the tenants’ election; both tenants disaffirmed (one during minority and the other within a reasonable time after reaching majority).
- The tenant who reached majority did not ratify the lease; his conduct was inconsistent with an intent to be bound.
- The landlord could not recover unpaid rent, utilities, late fees, or other claimed lease damages.
- The tenants were entitled to recover amounts they had paid under the lease, including the security deposit and rent already paid.
Legal Principles
- A minor’s contract is generally voidable at the minor’s election, subject to liability for the reasonable value of “necessaries.”
- Whether an item is a “necessary” depends on the minor’s actual circumstances; shelter is not a necessary when adequate parental housing is available.
- An adult who knowingly contracts with a minor assumes the risk that the minor will later disaffirm the agreement.
- Disaffirmance may be made during minority or within a reasonable time after reaching majority; ratification requires post-majority conduct clearly manifesting an intent to be bound.
- Emancipation does not, by itself, grant full contractual capacity or convert a non-necessary into a necessary.
- Upon proper disaffirmance of a non-necessary contract, the minor may recover payments made, and the other party cannot enforce the contract for future performance or damages.
Conclusion
The court held the apartment lease was not a necessary under the tenants’ circumstances, permitted disaffirmance by both minors, rejected post-majority ratification, and required judgment for the tenants, including restitution of payments and denial of the landlord’s claimed lease damages.