Reason for Not Enforcing a K Flashcards
(39 cards)
What is “bargained for” consideration?
Consideration that is asked for by the promisor IN EXCHANGE for her promises.
L rents to T. One month before the lease is up, L sends T a letter promising the renew the lease at the same rate. T paints the apt. Notwithstanding her promise to T, L increase the rent. T sues L for beach. L asserts no k because no consideration. Is T’s paining the apt consideration for L’s promise to renew the lease at the same rate? Explain.
No.
Painting could be considered a detriment, but T was never asked to paint. She did it on her own.
I make the following promise to you. “Stop listening to Kinky Friedman for 2 months and I’ll pay you $2k. You don’t. Notwithstanding your forebearance, I don’t pay. You sue for breach. Is there consideration supporting my promise to pay you $2k? Explain
Yes. You could have listened to Kinky, but didn’t.
What is consideration?
Bargained for legal detriment.
On April 15, B and Se enter into a written k in which B promises to buy S’s house and S promises to sell his house to B, with B’s payment and S’s transfer of title to occur on June 6.
Consideration for B’ promise to buy? For S’s promise to sell? Explain
Yes x2. A promise can be consideration.
S promises to sell and B promises to buy 600 sacks of grits in 6 equal installments. In the agreement, S reserves the right to terminate the agreement at any time without notice. Is there consideration for B’s promise? Explain.
No.
There is no detriment for S b/c he can cancel at any time. This promise is ILLUSORY and doesn’t count as consideration.
S promises to sell and B promises to buy 600 sacks of grits in 6 equal installments. In the agreement, S reserves the right to terminate the agreement on 10 days notice. Is there consideration for B’s promise? Explain.
Yes. This might seem illusory, but 10 days notice is a legal detriment.
Is past consideration generally able to suffice as consideration now?
No.
Apu saves Lisa’s life. Homer is so grateful that he promises to pay Apu $5k. Homer never pays. Is there consideration for Homer’s promise so that it is legally enforceable?
No.
Homer sees Lisa is in trouble and asks Apu to save Lisa’s life. Homer knows that Apu expects to be paid. Homer is so grateful that he promises to pay Apu $5k. Homer never pays. Is there consideration for Homer’s promise so that it is legally enforceable? Explain.
Yes. This is an exception to the rule that past consideration is not present consideration. Here, Homere EXPRESSLY REQUESTED the help and Apu EXPECTED TO BE PAID.
In the consideration context, what is the “pre-existing contractual or statutory duty” rule say?
Doing what you are already legally obligated to do IS NOT new consideration for a new promise to pay you more to do merely that.
A contracts with B to perform as the opening act for $15k. A then refuses to pay unless he is paid $20k. B promises to pay A the $20.
A performs. B only pays $15k. Is there consideration for B’s promise to pay the additional $5K? Explain
No. No new detriment for A. the “pre-existing contractual or statutory duty” rule applies.
Under the “pre-existing contractual or statutory duty” rule , what result if there is an addition to or change in performance?
New detriment, so new consideration.
A contracts with B to perform as the opening act for $15k. A then refuses to pay unless he is paid $20k. B promises to pay A the $20 IF he plays X song as his opener instead of Y. A performs as agreed. Is the additional $5k enforceable?
Yes
A contracts with B to perform as the opening act for $15k. A then refuses to pay unless he is paid $20k. C comes in and agrees to pay the extra $5k.
Is C’s promise to pay the additional $5k enforceable? Explain.
Yes. A 3rd party’s promise to pay is an exception to “pre-existing contractual or statutory duty” rule
A contracts with B to perform as the opening act for $15k.
The sound system at town hall is inoperative. B agrees to pay A an additional $5k if he still performs. A performs. Is the promise to pay the extra $5k enforceable? Explain.
Yes. Unforeseen difficulties so severe as to excuse performance are an exception to the pre-existing contractual or statutory duty” rule.
Does the pre-existing contractual or statutory duty” rule apply for the sale of goods?
No.
Under the UCC, new consideration is/isn’t required to modify a sale of goods k.
Isn’t
What is the test under the UCC for changes to an existing sale of goods k?
Good faith.
S contracts to sell 1k pounds of grits to B for $1k. S subsequently tells B that it cannot deliver the 1k pounds of grits for less than $1,300. B promises by fax to pay the additional $300. S delivers the 1,000 pounds of grits.
Is there new consideration for B’s new promises to pay $300 more?
Is the new promise enforceable? Explain.
No.
Yes. It was made in good faith.
When evaluating a question involving part payment as consideration for release, what is the key factor?
whether the debt is due and undisputed.
If debt is due and undisputed, then part payment is/isn’t consideration for release.
Isn’t
D owes C $3k. The debt is due and undisputed. C and D agreed that D will pay $2k in exchange for the release, i.e., C’s promise that she will not take any action to collect the remainder of the debt. D pays $2k.
Did C receive new consideration for her promise to release the balance of the debt? Explain.
No. No new detriment.
D owes C $3k. The debt is due and undisputed. C and D agreed that D will pay $2k in exchange for the release, i.e., C’s promise that she will not take any action to collect the remainder of the debt. D pays $2k.
Is the debt settlement legally enforceable? Explain.
No. If debt is due and undisputed, then part payment isn’t consideration for release.
