Strong v. Sheffield - flimsy, then there is no contract....

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Strong v. Sheffield 144 N.Y. 392 (1894) Fact: Operative Facts: A husband owed money to a lender. After he defaulted, the lender went to the wife and told her, if she agrees to pay the loan, then they won’t sue for the rest of the payment… until whenever they see fit Issue: Whether there was adequate consideration when the wife agrees to pay, and the bank doesn’t state a definite time they’ll withhold from suing Rule: If there is no consideration, or if the consideration is illusionary, basically not firm, or too
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: flimsy, then there is no contract. Rational: The lender did not say how long they were willing forebear the payments at the time of the contract. It didnt matter that it was forebeared for 2 years, at the time of the contract was made, there was a lack of consideration. Holding: If a party states that they will forebear on suing, but maintains the right to sue at anytime, then there is no consideration Synthesis: Dissent/Concurrences:...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 12/20/2011 for the course CONTRACTS 111 taught by Professor Dellinger during the Fall '11 term at Western State Colorado University .

Ask a homework question - tutors are online