Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
1
Chapter 11
Consideration and Promissory Estoppel
VI. Answers to Critical Legal Thinking Cases
11.1 Gift Promise
No. Presley’s promise to pay the mortgage is not enforceable. Presley’s promise to pay Ms. Allen’s
mortgage was not executed by the time Presley died. That is, Presley died before he had paid Allen’s
mortgage. Pressley’s promise to pay Alden’s mortgage was a gift promise that was not supported by any
consideration from Allen. Allen had not promised to do anything in return for Presley’s promise to pay
11.2 Consideration
No, there was no consideration supporting Tallas’s promise to pay Dementas. Tallas had not changed his
past services for Tallas, the promise by Tallas to pay $50,000 for services that were previously performed
by Dementas is not a promise supported by legal consideration. Events which occur prior to the making of
$50,000 was unenforceable because it was based on past consideration. Dementas v. Estate of Tallas, 764
P.2d 628, 1988 Utah App. Lexis 174 (Court of Appeals of Utah)
VII. Answer to Ethics Case
11.3 Ethics Case
Yes. The appellate court held that the pledge agreement made by Raymond P. Wirth to pay $150,000 to
name, per the terms of the attached Letter of Understanding. The Pledge Agreement further stated: “I
acknowledge that Drexel’s promise to use the amount pledged by me shall constitute full and adequate
Drexel and therefore the scholarship fund was not yet implemented, did not negate the sufficiency of the
promise as consideration to set up the fund. The appellate court held that the pledge agreement was
2
(Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, 2005)
