All individuals are presumed to be sane,51 and thus to be competent to make a will,52 enter into a contract53 or make a grant by deed.50 Conversely, where a person has been found to be mentally ill, such mental illness is presumed to be continuing in the absence of evidence to the contrary.55
The law presumes that all adults possess such ordinary intelligence, judgment and discretion as will enable them to appreciate an obvious danger.56 Consistent with this presumption, individuals are presumed to intend the natural and probable consequences of their acts.57 People are presumed to have read documents signed by them and to understand the plain meaning of documents read by them.58 Further, all Delaware residents are presumed to know the statutes and existing laws of Delaware and the political subdivisions in which such residents reside, at least to the extent that failure to inform oneself of the law will not relieve a party from legal liability.59
Delaware law presumes that investors act with the motive of maximizing the value of their investments.59.1
51. State v. Hurley, 1 Houst. Cr. Cas. 28, 37 (Del. 1858); In re Conner, 226 A.2d 126, 131 (Del. Ch. 1967); Reeve v. Bonwill, 5 Del. Ch. 1, 6 (Del. Ch. 1874); State v. Curtin, 95 A. 232, 235 (Del. Gen. Sess. 1914); Rogers v. Rogers, 66 A. 374, 375 (Del. Super. 1907); State v. Pratt, 1 Houst. Cr. Cas. 249, 268 (Del. O. & T. 1867); State v. Danby, 1 Houst Cr. Cas. 166, 174 (Del. O. & T: 1864); Lodge v. Lodge’s Will, 7 Del. 418, 2 Houst. 418, 423 (Del. Super. 1862); Lessees of Armstrong v. Timmons, 3 Del. 342, 3 Harr. 342 (Del. Super. 1841); Duffield v. Robeson, 2 Del. 375, 2 Harr. 375, 379 (Del. Super. 1838); Masten v. Anderson, 2 Del. 381, 2 Harr. 381 n.(a) (Del. Super. 1838). See also Longoria v. State, 168 A.2d 695, 704 (Del. 1961), cert. denied and appeal dismissed, 368 U.S. 10 (1961); Greenbaum v. Keil, 62 A.2d 441, 445 (Del. Ch. 1948); Frazer v. Frazer, 2 Del. Ch. 260, 263 (Del, Ch. 1861); Doe ex dem. Guest v. Beeson, 7 Del. 246, 2 Houst. 246 (Del. Super. 1860).
52. In re Estate of West, 522 A.2d 1256, 1263 (Del. 1987); In re Langmeier, 466 A.2d 386, 389 (Del. Ch. 1983); In re Estate of Hailett, 295 A.2d 755, 756 (Del. Ch. 1972).
53. Reeve v. Bonwill, 5 Del. Ch. 1, 6. (Del. Ch. 1874).
54. Townsend v. Townsend, 137 A.2d 381, 382 (Del. Ch. 1957).
55. In re Lewis, 403 A.2d 1115, 1117 (Del. 1979); Ray v. State, 262 A.2d 643, 645 (Del. 1970); Mills v. State, 256 A.2d 752, 755 (Del. 1969); Gow v. Consolidated Coppermines Corp., 165 A. 136, 148 (Del. Ch. 1933); State v. Tarbutton, 407 A.2d 538, 542 (Del. Super. 1979); Lessees of Armstrong v. Timmons, 3 Del. 342, 3 Harr. 342, 345 (Del. Super. 1841); Duffield v. Robeson, 2 Del. 375, 2 Harr. 375, 383 (Del. Super. 1838).
56. Louft v. C. & J. Pyle Co., 75 A. 619, 622 (Del. Super. 1910).
57. Leech v. Husbands, 152 A. 729, 734 (1930).
58. DuPont v. DuPont, 164 A. 238, 245 (Del. Ch. 1933); Employers’ Liability Assur. Corp. v. Madric, 174 A.2d 809, 814 (Del. Super. 1961), rev’d on other grounds, 183 A.2d 182 (Del. 1962); Green v. Maloney, 30 A. 672, 673 (Del. Super. 1884).
59. Clark v. State, 287 A.2d 660, 664 (Del. 1972), cert. denied and appeal dismissed, 409 U.S. 812 (1972); Weinberg v. Baltimore Brick Co., 108 A.2d 81, 83 (Del. Ch. 1954), aff’d, 114 A.2d 812 (Del. 1955); Lowe v. Williams, 18 A.2d 424, 426 (1941); Longwood Homes, Inc. v. New Castle County, 349 A.2d 19, 21 (Del. Super. 1975); Tucker v. Crawford, 315 A.2d 737, 740 (Del. Super. 1974); J. I. Kislak Mortg. Corp. v. William Matthews Builder, Inc., 287 A.2d 686, 689 (Del. Super. 1972), aff’d, 303 A.2d 648 (Del. 1973); Mitchell v. Delaware State Tax Com’r, 42 A.2d 19, 23 (Del. Super. 1945); Black v. H. Feinberg Furniture Co., 3 A.2d 62, 63 (Del. Super. 1938).
59.1. Unitrin Inc. v. American General Corp., 651 A.2d 1361, 1380-81 (Del. 1995).
© 2010 David L. Finger