Weakness Of Mind

Before proceeding to discuss the law of contractual incompetency applicable in this state to a contract entered into by a manic-depressive psychotic, we note that the Legislature has catagorized incompetency due to weakness of mind as follows: (1) Total weakness of mind which leaves a person entirely without understanding and renders such person incapable of making a contract of any kind (Civ.Code, s 38); (2) a lesser weakness of mind which does not leave a person entirely without understanding but destroys the capacity of the person to make a contract, thus rendering the contract subject to rescission (Civ.Code, s 39); and (3) a still lesser weakness which provides sufficient grounds to rescind a contract because of undue influence. (Civ.Code, s 1575; see Odorizzi v. Bloomfield School Dist., supra, 246 Cal.App.2d at p. 131, 54 Cal.Rptr. 533.) The last mentioned statute, in subdivision 2 thereof, provides that undue influence consists 'In taking an unfair advantage of another's weakness of mind.' In Odorizzi it is noted that the lesser weakness of mind referred to in [262 Cal.App.2d 835] section 1575 need not be long lasting or wholly incapacitating, but may consist of such factors as lack of full vigor due to age, physical condition, emotional anguish, or a combination of such factors. (P. 131, 54 Cal.Rptr. 533.) It would appear, therefore, that since the manic-depressive psychosis is a mental illness it is clearly a weakness of mind in the context of Civil Code section 1575.


Smalley v. Baker (1968) 262 Cal.App.2d 824, 834-835(Manic depression insufficient weakness to render contract fit for recission).