However, it can also be seen that in practice, minors may still contract to purchase and convey property and their acts are considered valid if not timely disaffirmed. Thus, it seems clear that the statutes, similar to statutes which have existed for decades, state that any contract entered into by a minor is void and, therefore, will always be held invalid.
Furthermore, if a minor's incapacity due to age is removed by the appropriate state court, the minor, regardless of age, shall have the capacity to act as an adult. However, Oklahoma courts have held that such contracts are void and voidable.
This decision seems consistent with the case law history which shows that minors have in fact been allowed to contract to both buy and convey real and personal property throughout this century. 1948).3/A minor beneficiary who is emancipated may also contract to purchase property if that property is "necessary for his support, or that of his family, entered into by him when not under the care of a parent or guardian able to provide for him or them."4/ See Okla. A review of the Oklahoma statutes and case law fails to reveal any restriction on the ability to hold title to property based on age. Notes attached to the statute state that there is no limitation on the age at which majority status may be conferred upon a minor.
The Oklahoma Supreme Court has specifically ruled that an automobile is a necessity for an emancipated worker who needs the vehicle to get to work to support himself and his family.6/ Thus, the state of Oklahoma permits an emancipated minor to hold title to an automobile if that vehicle is used to travel to work in order to support himself or his family.7/In your second question, you asked whether there were any restrictions on the ability to hold title based on the age of the minor.
For the above reasons, we believe that the State of Oklahoma permits a minor to hold title to property both real and personal. 698, wherein the court noted: "The commentators and text-writers themselves do not agree, and the adjudications are irreconcilable, and some cannot be explained upon any well-established principles of law or equity." See ex.
Thus, the legal and beneficial title to the property of the minor is in the ward rather than the guardian. Grant County Bank, 379 P.2d at 697 (citing Chancellor v. Thus, the property should be held or titled in the name of the minor. Further, state statutes limit what investments may be made with a minor's property without application to the appropriate court.
Even the Courts have recognized that it is difficult to state what the better law is given the numerous contradictory rulings.2/ Perhaps to reflect actual practice and to address the inconsistencies in case law through the years, a current state statute provides that "the contract of a minor may be disaffirmed by the minor himself, either before his majority or within one (1) year's time afterwards....
In Oklahoma, it is well established that while a guardian should act on behalf of the minor in regard to the minor ward's property, legal and beneficial title to the property is in the ward rather than the guardian.
The title rests in the name of the minor and not the guardian.1/ Minors are defined as "persons under eighteen (18) years of age." See Okla.
We further believe that there are no specific requirements on how property should be titled to show the minor as the titleholder.
You asked that the following questions be answered:1.