Unformatted text preview: executor of Story Sr.’s estate. Sidway refused to pay the money to Hamer, claiming that there was no “valid” consideration of the agreement, and therefore the agreement was not legitimate. Hamer filed suit. Issue: Did the nephew give valid and legitimate consideration under the law? Decision: Yes. The nephew gave up legal rights in order to fulfill the agreement, and therefore provided consideration. Reasoning: The court addresses the defendant’s contention that Story’s actions could not be consideration because they were beneficial to him, and that he would have done them despite the agreement with his uncle. The court says that forbearance, surrendering of legal rights and privileges, is consideration regardless of whether it benefits the forbearer. Because the nephew willingly surrendered his legal rights to drink, gamble, and use tobacco, he adequately fulfilled his duty of consideration, and was entitled to the agreed payment....
View Full Document
- Spring '12
- Law, William E. Story II, William E. Story, Story Sr., William E. Story Sr.