Case Name: Stone vs. Knight
Court: United States Circuit Court for the District of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1793
Citations: 1 Mart. 207
Docket Number: 
Parties: *Stone vs. Knight.
Judges: And the whole court, viz. Doderidge, J. Jones, J. and Whitlock, J. assented.
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 1
Pages: 207–208

Head Matter:
*Stone vs. Knight.
Trin. 3 Car.
THERE being divers matters of controversy between the father and Margaret, his daughter of the one part, and Knight of the other part; the father and daughter of the one part, and Knight of the other, submitted themselves to an arbitration of all quarrels. The girl being within age, the father bound himself to Knight, that he and she would perform the award on their part. The arbitrators awarded that Knight should pay so much to the girl, who would release all actions to him, and that the father and daughter should afterwards release all actions to Knight. Knight did not pay the money at the day; and the daughter brought debt on the obligation.
Banks moved. 1. Whether the submission is void? For if so, the arbitration is void; and if the arbitration is void, then Knight is not bound: for an obligation to perform a void award is void. 8 E. 4. I. 8 E. 4. 22. 19 E. 4. 1. 10 Rep. 31.
And the whole court, viz. Doderidge, J. Jones, J. and Whitlock, J. assented.
2. The arbitration is void: for the submission of the infant is void. The father and daughter are here one party, and as one person in the submission. Where two persons submit themselves on one side; one alone cannot revoke it, ergo if it be void as to the infant, it is so as to the father also. Because the intention of the parties is, that all controversies, between the parties, should be terminated; which cannot be if the infant is not bound. An arbitration is to be expounded according to the intention, 10 rep. 57. But the submission of the infant is void; then the arbitration is of something not submitted to the arbitrators.
Noy, e contra.
The submission of the infant is good, for it is for his benefit. Otherwise an infant would be in pejore casu, than a person of full age, who may terminate his controversies by arbitration, and to avoid the charge of a suit; while he (the infant) would be compelled to endure the extreme rigor of the law. True it is, that if an infant binds himself to perform an award, the obligation is void, but the submission is good. 13 H. 4, 12. 10 H. 6. 14.

Opinion:
Doderidge, J.
An infant of 18 years of age, may submit to an arbitration, but may not bind himself by a penalty. He may be administrator.