Case Name: Britton v. Williams's Devisees
Court: Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia
Jurisdiction: Virginia
Decision Date: 1819-12-15
Citations: 6 Munf. 453
Docket Number: 
Parties: Britton v. Williams’s Devisees.
Judges: 
Reporter: Virginia Reports
Volume: 20
Pages: 805–806

Head Matter:
Britton v. Williams’s Devisees.
Decided, Dec. 15th, 1819.
i. infants— Submission to Arbitration — Binding Effect, —Altho’ infants are hound by judgments had im- der tie superintendance and protection of the Court: yet, where the case is referred to arbitrators, whereby they are deprived of that protection, a submission, even by rule of Court, ought not to be sanctioned; even though the award be in their favour. Por, as awards are in the nature of judgments, and are to be final and conclusive, which can not be where one party has a right to avoid them; It follows that a submission by infants, although with adults, can not be obligatory on either party.
In an action of 'Trespass on the case in the County Court of Halifax, brought by William h. Williams and others, (several of whom, being infants, sued by E. C. Williams their next friend,) against Isham Britton, an order of reference to arbitrators was made, by consent of parties, after the writ was returned executed; no declaration being filed. An award was returned in favour of the plaintiffs; to which the defendant by his attorney excepted'; 1st for misbehaviour in the arbitrators; and 2dly, for want of reciprocity; in this, that some of the plaintiffs were infants, and therefore could not be bound *by the award. The County Court, overruling the exceptions, gave judgment for the plaintiffs-; and, that judgment being affirmed by the Superior Court, the defendant again appealed.
Infant — Submission to Arbitration — Binding Effect. —Neither at common law, nor under the first section of chapter 108 of the Code of West Virginia, can an infant hind himself absolutely by an agreement, made out of court, to arbitrate; nor can his counsel so bind him by his consent in court. McGinnis v. Gurry, 13 W. Ya. 52, citing principal case. See further. monographic note on "Infants’' appended to Caperton v. Gregory. 11 Gratt 506; monographic note on ‘‘Arbitration and Award” appended to Bassett v. Cunningham, 9 Gratt. 684.

Opinion:
The following was the opinion of this Court.
Although infants are bound by judgments had under the superintendence and protection of the Court; yet, where the case is referred to arbitrators, whereby they are deprived of that protection, a submission by infants, even by rule of Court, ought not to be sanctioned. For, as awards are in the nature of Judgments, and are to be final and conclusive, which can not be, where one party has a right to avoid them; it follows that a submission by infants, although with adults, can not be obligatory on either party.
As there was, therefore, no valid sub-, mission in this case, there could be no award; and consequently the judgment is erroneous, and must be reversed with costs,' as far back as the Writ, and the cause sent to the rules for farther proceedings.