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
Nevada:
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.
Nevada: In Nevada, the age of majority is 18, Nevada Revised Statutes (N.R.S.) § 129.010,
and, here also, there is no general preclusion against a minor holding title to real
or personal property. Again, however, concerns similar to those set forth above with
respect to California apply.
Nevada cases, like the other states in the Region, have generally recognized, at least
by implication, the property rights of minors. In Wren v. Dixon (1916) 161 P. 722, the Supreme Court of Nevada stated that the "title to real property
vests" in the heirs and devisees at the moment of death of the testator or intestate,
and it noted that the California Supreme Court had also recognized such rights. 161
P. at 732. The court also noted that the heirs were minors and found that title had
vested in them. It further found that they were not barred by their minority from
maintaining an action to quiet title to the property. Id. In Keyworth v. Nevada Packard Mines Co. (1920) 186 P. 1110, that same court upheld an Arizona statute that provided that
minors between the ages of 18 and 21 (the age of majority at that time) could convey
their interests in mining claims in the same manner as persons over age 21.
Here, again, the property rights of minors were recognized by implication.
More recently, the fact that no adverse possession could be obtained as against the
property rights of minors was recognized in Lombardo Turquoise Milling & Mining Co. v. Hemanes, 430 F.Supp. 429 (1977), citing Wren v. Dixon, supra. Nevada statutes also generally recognize the right of any person to hold real
property in the State. See N.R.S. § 111.055. General preclusions against contracts by minors raise potential
problems similar to those discussed above with respect to California. See N.R.S. § 129.010 (no ability to contract unless 18 or emancipated); compare N.R.S.
§ 687B.070 (minors can contract for automobile insurance if at least 16). The Nevada
Uniform Transfers to Minors Act, N.R.S § 167.010, 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.