Warning

Info

🏅 UnreasonableWoman, SLS '24 |

0 0

Halbman v. Lemke

298 N.W.2d 562 (Sup. Ct. Wis. 1980)

tl;dr: A Defendant sold a car to a minor. The minor was making payments on the car, but then it broke down and Plaintiff wanted to void the agreement under the infancy doctrine. Defendant refused to restore the minor's consideration for the broken-down car.

IRACIssue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion

🤯 High points 🤯Key points contributed by students on LSD

Facts & Holding

Facts:Defendant Lemke was boss to Plaintiff Halbman, a minor. Defendant...

Holding:Affirmed. Under the majority/traditional rule of the infancy doctrine, the...

Halbman v. Lemke

Chat for Halbman v. Lemke
brief-174
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you