Hi, Please see the attached

Contractual Capacity

Issue: The issue presented in this case is weather the Management Company should return the money Thomas had paid in rent for the time that he lived in the apartment and the reasonable value was $650 per month.

The rule of law : the rule of law defines a contract for necessaries as that involving food, shelter, or medical cover for the minor, with other states extending it to education fees, health charges, and the comfort of the minor. The rule of law provides that a minor has the capacity to disaffirm from such a contract but must pay a reasonable amount that matches the value of the necessaries. However, if the services have been provided to the guardian for the benefit of the minor, the guardian is liable and not the minor. The minor might be charged with the costs when they become of the majority age where the guardian does not comply.

Analysis: In this case scenario, the contract of necessaries is represented by signing an annual lease for an apartment where Thomas agreed to pay a yearly lease of $900 per month. At this 2 time, Thomas is 17 years old, making him a minor. Five months later, the subject is still a minor, and the law provides him with the capacity to disaffirm the contract. However, he has to pay a reasonable value for the apartment, $650 per month. Therefore, the company should refund the extra charges added to the reasonable monthly rent of the apartment as per the law.

Conclusion There existed a valid contract between the company and the minor and the minor has the capacity to disaffirm the contract but under the condition of paying a reasonable amount to the value of the apartment and being refunded the excess amount by the company.

Teacher’s comments:

The issue is a single sentence and must be a concept from the notes. Issue: Can Thomas disaffirm the contract and receive his money back?

The rule of law contains the full definition of all theories that apply. Define contractual capacity and why a minor can disaffirm, when they can disaffirm, how they disaffirm, and contracts for necessaries and reasonable value.

Here you want to compare the facts to the legal theories in the rule of law and use them to support your analysis. Analysis: Thomas was minor when he made the contract and when he disaffirmed. He clearly expressed his intent to disaffirm, and he moved out of the apartment. However, since the apartment is a necessary, Thomas may disaffirm but must pay the reasonable value of a contract for necessaries. Since the reasonable value is $650, Thomas is entitled to a refund of 1,250 because he paid $250 over the reasonable value for five months.

The conclusion is a single sentence and answers the question in the issue. Conclusion: Thomas can disaffirm the contract and receive the difference between what he paid and the reasonable value.