Frazer v
Categories: Contracts
Definition (1910 Edition)
Frazer, 2 Del. Ch. 263. . Other definitions. Insanity is a manifestation of disease of the brain, characterized by a ne hep or partial derangement of one or more aculties of the mind, and in which, while consciousness is not abolished, mental freedom is érverted, weakened, or destroyed. Hammond, ervous System, 332. The prolonged departure, without any adequate cause, from the states of feeling and modes of thinking usual to the:‘individual in health. Bouvier. By insanity is not meant (in law) a total deprivation of reason, but only an. inability, from defect of perception, memory, and judgment, to do the act in question, [with an intelligent apprehension of its nature and consequences.] So, by a lucid interval is not meant a perfect restoration to reason, but a restoration so far as to be able, ‘beyond doubt, to comprehend and to do the act with such reason, memory, and judgment as to ge . a legal act. Frazer v. Frazer, 2 Del.
Frazer, 2 Del. Ch. 260. The insanity must have entered into and induced the particular contract or conveyance; it ‘Must appear that it was not the act of the free and untrammeled mind, and that on account of the diseased condition of the mind the person entered into a contract or made a conveyance which he would not have made if he had been in the possession of his reason. Dewey v. Allgire, 37 Neb. 6, 65 N. W. 276, 40 Am. St. Rep. 468; Dennett v. Dennett, 44 N. H. 5387, 84 Am. Dec. 97. Insanity sufficlient to justify the annulment of a marriage meuns such a want of understanding at the time of the marriage as to render the party incapable of assenting to the contract of marriage. The morbid propensity to steal, called “kleptomania,” does not answer this description. Lewis v. Lewis, 44 Minn. 124, 46 N. W. 823, 9 L. R. A. 505, 20 Am. St. Rep. 559.
Frazer, 2 Del. Ch. 260. The insanity must have entered into and induced the particular contract or conveyance; it ‘Must appear that it was not the act of the free and untrammeled mind, and that on account of the diseased condition of the mind the person entered into a contract or made a conveyance which he would not have made if he had been in the possession of his reason. Dewey v. Allgire, 37 Neb. 6, 65 N. W. 276, 40 Am. St. Rep. 468; Dennett v. Dennett, 44 N. H. 5387, 84 Am. Dec. 97. Insanity sufficlient to justify the annulment of a marriage meuns such a want of understanding at the time of the marriage as to render the party incapable of assenting to the contract of marriage. The morbid propensity to steal, called “kleptomania,” does not answer this description. Lewis v. Lewis, 44 Minn. 124, 46 N. W. 823, 9 L. R. A. 505, 20 Am. St. Rep. 559.
Source: Black's Law Dictionary, 2nd Edition (1910) — Public Domain.
UK commentary and modern updates are original additions. This entry is for educational
reference only and does not constitute legal advice.