Obstacle to enforcement of K

Question 1

Consideration

Answer 1

“a bargained for exchange that sustains some detriment”

bargained-for legal detriment

it is ALWAYS person specific -
what did he bargain for?

Question 2

Forms of consideration

Answer 2

1. performance
2. forbearance - not doing something legally entitled to do
3. promises to perform
4. promise not to forbear

Question 3

bargained for issue

Answer 3

consideration must be asked for by promisor IN EXCHANGE FOR her promise

Question 4

Legal detriment

Answer 4

If you have a legal entitlement to do something and you do not do it for a deal, then it’s consideration.

Question 5

promises alone for consideration

Answer 5

YES - consideration even if no performance.

Ex. B promises to buy S house and S promises to sell his house to B. THERE IS CONSIDERATION.

Question 6

Illusory promise

Answer 6

NOT OKAY

ex. B promises to buy S hues and S promises to sell his house, but changes mind. NO .

Question 7

Contingency for promises for consideration valid?

Answer 7

YES. Good faith that other person will get their shit together and fulfill promise.

Question 8

Adequacy of consideration

Answer 8

It is not at issue - courts will not inquire into the adequacy of consideration because peppercorns something something. GOOD ENOUGH.

Question 9

Nominal consideration

Answer 9

SHAM transaction - dad selling his house to his daughter for $1 is a joke. It’s not a true bargained for exchange. courts will NOT enforce this.

Question 10

Past consideration

Answer 10

NOT VALID FORM OF CONSIDERATION.

Question 11

Ex. Apu saves lisa. Homer promises to pay $30k. Homer changes his mind. Promise enforceable?

Answer 11

Bargained for exchange? NO. Past consideration. Gift promise made in recognition of the help NOT A CONTRACT. GIFT PROMISE.

must be current consideration.

Question 12

Exception to past consideration

Answer 12

Express request and expectation of payment

Question 13

Ex. request Apu to save Lisa, knowing Apu would expect to be paid for services.

Answer 13

(McGowan v. Webb) - subsequent promise enforceable, there was immediate benefit conferred.

Question 14

Preexisting contractual or statutory duty rule

Answer 14

Common Law different from Art. 2.

Gen: What you are already legally required to do is not consideration for a promise to pay you more to do merely that. you need new consideration to modify K governed by common law.

Question 15

Alaska fish packers K -

Answer 15

you can’t get more money for what you already K’d for.

Question 16

What if SNL asks her specifically for a certain song when AShley was going to sing another song?

Answer 16

Then it’s new consideration -

Question 17

Exception - unforeseen difficulty to excuse performance

Answer 17

is party still performs when the circumstances become harder, then more money for a preexisting legal duty is valid. NO ONE FORESAW the difficulty.

Question 18

Exception - 3d party promise to pay

Answer 18

If a 3d party makes an additional promise to Ashley the same legal performance then its VALID.

Question 19

ARTICLE 2 - PREEXISTING RULE?

Answer 19

modification is OKAY as long as it’s made in good faith

Question 20

Ex: S Ks to sell widgets to B for 1K. S tells B that it can’t deliver widgets for less than 1300. B promises to pay the additional 300. S delivers. Does B have to pay the additional 300?

Answer 20

YES. It’s a mere technicality. Must be good faith. Must be merchants. Must be reasonable. Extortion not okay.

Question 21

Part Payment as consideration for release (promise to forgive balance of debt)

Answer 21

Part payment is not consideration for it’s release.

1. is debt due and undisputed?
2. then NO.

Question 22

Can you release a debtor if debt is due and they pay part?

Answer 22

NO.

Question 23

What if creditor allows you to pay the debt early for a different amount?

Answer 23

YES – creditor gave new consideration in exchange for your faster payment.

Question 24

Consideration substitute: written promise to pay debt barred by some technical defense like an SOL

Answer 24

Written promise to satisfy to which you have legal defense, it is still enforceable even though no new consideration for it

Question 25

Ex. D owes C $1000. SOL passes and C can't collect. D says sorry I fucked up, and WRITES to him "i know I owe you a grand but I'll pay you $600 instead." Valid?

Answer 25

YES. new written promise for $600 enforceable even without consideration.

Question 26

Promissory estoppel

Answer 26

1. promise made 2. reliance reasonable, detrimental, foreseeable 3. enforcement necessary to avoid injustice

Question 27

Lack of capacity

Answer 27

1. infants (under 18) 2. mental imcompetents 3. intoxicated persons IF OTHER PARTY HAS REASON TO KNOW

Question 28

consequences of incapacity - right to disaffirm by person without capacity

Answer 28

if you fuck up, then the older person can't sue you for failure to perform. If you fully performance but lack capacity, then you can collect as a minor since you did it.

Question 29

Implied affirmation by retaining benefit after gaining capacity

Answer 29

VALID if you hang on to the benefit when you reach capacity. If you buy a car at 17 and don't pay and fuck around on the K it's fine, but if you keep the benefit at 18 then your'e screwed.

Question 30

liability for necessities

Answer 30

a person who does not have capacity is legally obligated to pay for things that are necessary (food, clothing, med car or shelter) but liability based on quasi contract law, not contract law.

Question 31

Statute of Frauds defense

Answer 31

designed to prevent fraudulent claims.

Question 32

Is the contract subject matter fall within the SOF?

Answer 32

1. promise in consideration of marriage 2. promise by executor to pay obligation of estate from his own funds 3. promise to answer the debts of another 4. service contract not capable of being performed within 1 year from time of contract 5. Transfers of interest of real property for term of more than one year 6. SALE OF GOODS OVER $500

Question 33

"H claims that W agreed to renounce any claim to property that he owned prior to the marriage if he would marry her - is this an SOF?

Answer 33

YES. HOLLA WE WANT PRENUP. consideration: renounce and claim to property performance: marriage

Question 34

"F funeral home claims that E executor of D promised that he would personally pay for D's funeral"

Answer 34

YES - Statute of Frauds. D would uusaly pay, so better get it in writing that it's someone else.

Question 35

Promise to answer for debts of another"

Answer 35

not merela a promise to pay but rather a promise to pay if someone else does not - GUARANTEE.

Question 36

B buys paint from S on credit. B does not pay S. S claims that T promised she would pay for paint he delivered to B. Is T's promise within the SOF?

Answer 36

NO.

Question 37

S class that G promised to pay for the paint if B defaulted. Is Gs promise within SOF?

Answer 37

YES. Specific to the person and language specific to a guarantee.