You have requested a legal opinion, on a state-by-state basis, addressing specific
issues related to the purchase of property by representative payees on behalf of minors.
The following opinion, preceded by a summary in the format of the opinion request,
addresses the issues presented in the November 2, 1998 memorandum from the Associate
Commissioner, Office of Program Benefits, appended to your memorandum of December
2, 1998.
OPINION
The questions include whether a state permits a minor to hold title to real property
or personal property, such as an automobile; if so, whether there are restrictions
as to the age of the minor or the types of property that can be held; whether there
are specific requirements regarding how property should or must be titled to show
the minor as the titleholder; and, if a state does not permit a minor to hold title,
or does not permit property to be titled or registered in the name of a minor, what
is the preferred method of titling the property to reflect or protect the minor's
interest in the property and satisfy SSA's regulatory requirements?
Generally and historically, the right of minors to hold real and personal property
has been recognized and upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, see Oyama v. California, 332 U.S. 633, 68 S.Ct. 269 (1948), and that decision is still good law. The case
law and statutes of the states in Region IX have recognized this right, primarily
by implication. The general conclusion of this opinion is that minors generally can
hold title, with some exceptions, but that other legal and practical concerns make
it highly advisable for the property of minors to be held by trustees or other proper
representatives. Specific issues with respect to how title can be held are discussed
below. Since California has the most comprehensive body of law in this area, and often
serves as a model for the less populous states in the Region, it is discussed first.
SUMMARY OF OPINION
Arizona:
Q: Does the State permit a minor to hold title to real property or personal property
such as an automobile?
A: Here also, there is no general preclusion against minors holding title to real
or personal property. Specific statutory and case law are discussed in the attached
opinion.
Q: If, so, are there any restrictions as to the age of the minor or the types of property
that can be held?
A: No. However, see discussion in California section, above, with respect to potential problems with
minors holding title.
Q: Are there any specific requirements on how the property should/must be titled to
show the minor as the titleholder?
A: No. However, see discussion in California section, above, with respect to potential problems with
minors holding title.
Q: If a State does not permit a minor to hold title to property, or does not permit
the property to be titled/registered in the minor's name, what is the preferred method(s)
of titling the property to reflect or protect the minor's interest in the property
and satisfy SSA's regulatory requirements?
A: Not generally applicable. However, see discussion in California section, above, with respect to potential problems with
minors holding title.
Arizona: In Arizona, the age of majority is 18, A.R.S. §1215, and there is no general
preclusion against a minor holding title to real or personal property. Here also,
however, concerns similar to those set forth above with respect to California apply.
Arizona cases also have recognized, at least by implication, the property rights of
minors. In Huish v. Lopez (1950) 70 Ariz. 201, 218 P.2d 727, the Supreme Court of Arizona found that a minor
"was the owner" of the subject real property which had been sold by a relative acting
as an agent on her behalf. 70 Ariz. at 203. Although, in that case, the court further
found that the owner had ratified the acts of the agent upon attaining the age of
majority, it also recognized the general right of minors to avoid contracts due to
infancy.
Arizona statutes also are consistent with the general concept that minors can hold
title to property. For example, A.R.S. § 42-18151 (B) provides that a tax lien that
is sold "on real property of a minor..." is subject to redemption only in the manner
provided for persons who are under no such disability. Similarly, A.R.S. § 42-18203
also references actions to foreclose the right of redemption with respect to liens
sold "on real property of minors.... " A.R.S. § 6-432 authorizes the payment by a
savings and loan institution directly to a minor "who is the holder of the account."
Noteworthy with respect to such statutes, and applicable to similar statutes of other
states, is the general maxim of statutory interpretation, that it must be presumed
that legislative acts achieve an operative result and that the legislature would not
do a futile thing. See generally Sands, Sutherland's Statutory Construction, Vol. 2A, § 45.12. Statutory
references to the rights of minors to hold property would be meaningless if such rights
did not exist.
Cases addressing contracts and conveyances by minors in Arizona generally have also
found them voidable. E.g. Huish v. Lopez, supra. Thus, potential problems due to minors holding title are similar to those
discussed above with respect to California. The Arizona Uniform Transfers to Minors
Act, A.R.S § 14-7651, et seq., offers essentially similar features as the California
version of the Act.
1/ All references in this memorandum to the age of majority will be to the age at
which an individual no longer is considered to be a minor under the general statutory
provisions of the particular state or territory. It should be noted that the Uniform
Transfers to Minors Act, as codified by certain states, defines minors differently
for the provisions of that statutory scheme. See Hawaii Revised Statutes (H.R.S.) §§ 577-1 (age 18), 553A-1 (age 21); Arizona Revised
Statutes (A.R.S.) §§ 1-215 (age 18), 14-7651 (age 21).
2/ 8 U.S.C. § 42, now 42 U.S.C. § 1982. Also noteworthy is fact that the referenced
statute specifically pertains to both real and personal property.
3/ With the exception of emancipated minors. See Cal. Fam. Code § 7050.