At a
large party, Uncle Story promised Nephew Story that if he didn't drink
before 21, he'd pay him $5k.Nephew Story did as he was told, and when he turned 21 he wrote his
uncle for the money.The
Uncle wrote him a letter saying he had the money in the bank, but would
hold it for him.Several
years later he died without giving any money to Nephew Story.Nephew Story sold the promise of
$5000 to Hamer, who then sued the executor of the estate for the money.
Trial
Court found that it was indeed a valid contract, and that Nephew Story had
lived up to his part of the bargain.
Defendant
claimed that the contract was without consideration and was therefore void.By not drinking the promisee was
not harmed, but benefited!
Appellate
Court reversed the Trial Court's decision.
New
York Supreme Court, based on the definition of consideration, found that consideration had been given and reversed the decision again.
It
does not matter what the consideration is, or what it is worth to whom, it just matters that one person
gives something up in
exchange for something else.
Btw,
the nephew could not give up the right to drink until 21 under today's
law because that would be illegal.A consideration could not be a promise to give up something that
you can't legally do.
