Hayes v. Plantations Steel by 77iis9

VIEWS: 2 PAGES: 32

									       Hayes v. Plantations Steel
• Court calls this an implied in fact contract.
  What is that?
      Hayes v. Plantations Steel
• Issue presented?
      Hayes v. Plantations Steel
• Issue Presented?
• Was there valid consideration to support the
  promise to pay a pension?
      Hayes v. Plantations Steel
Possible consideration
• Retirement
• Twenty five years of faithful service
• Week of work in between “promise” and
  actual retirement.
       Hayes v. Plantations Steel
• Retirement
“consideration consists either in some right,
  interest, or benefit accruing to one party or some
  forbearance, detriment, or responsibility given,
  suffered, or undertaken by the other. . . Valid
  consideration furthermore must be bargained for.
  It must induce the return act or promise. To be
  valid, therefore, the purported consideration
  must not have been delivered before a promise is
  executed, that is, given without reference to the
  promise.”
      Hayes v. Plantations Steel
• Past Service
“To be valid, therefore, the purported
  consideration must not have been delivered
  before a promise is executed, that is, given
  without reference to the promise.”
       Hayes v. Plantations Steel
• One week work between
“Valid consideration furthermore must be
  bargained for. It must induce the return act or
  promise.”
       Hayes v. Plantations Steel
• How does court distinguish Bredemann case?
• “However, Bredemann is distinguishable
  because the court characterized that promise
  as a concrete offer to pay if she would retire
  immediately.”
What is Promissory Estoppel?
   Section 90 Restatement Second of
               Contracts
A promise which the promisor should
reasonably expert to induce action or
forbearance on the part of the promisee or a
third person and which does induce such
action or forbearance is binding if injustice
can be avoided only by enforcement of the
promise. The remedy granted for breach may
be limited as justice requires.
      Hayes v. Plantations Steel
• What was going on here? Why did company
  stop making the payments?
       Hayes v. Plantations Steel
• What was going on here? Why did company
  stop making the payments?
• “At that time a succession of several poor
  business years plus the stockholders’ dispute,
  resulting in the takeover by the DiMartino
  family, contributed to the decision to stop the
  payments.”
• This is the whole reason for contracts. Things
  change. New circumstances may lead new
  people to decide to do otherwise.
             Mills v. Wyman
• What are the facts?
            Mills v. Wyman
• What is the holding?
             Mills v. Wyman
“A deliberate promise, in writing, made freely
  and without any mistake, one which may lead
  the party to whom it is made into contracts
  and expenses, cannot be broken without a
  violation of moral duty. But if there was
  nothing paid or promised for it, the law,
  perhaps wisely, leaves the execution of it to
  the conscience of him who makes it.”
             Mills v. Wyman
“A deliberate promise, in writing, made freely
  and without any mistake, one which may lead
  the party to whom it is made into contracts
  and expenses, cannot be broken without a
  violation of moral duty. But if there was
  nothing paid or promised for it, the law,
  perhaps wisely, leaves the execution of it to
  the conscience of him who makes it.”
In other words: to be enforceable a promise
  must be supported by legal consideration.
              Mills v. Wyman
More precisely:
 “The general position, that moral obligation is
 a sufficient consideration for an express
 promise, is to be limited in its application to
 cases where at some time or other a good or
 valuable consideration has existed.”
             Mills v. Wyman
• What are the exceptions covered by the end
  of this statement?
             Mills v. Wyman
• What are the exceptions covered by the end
  of this statement?
• Promise to pay debt barred by statute of
  limitations
• Promise to pay debt discharged in bankruptcy
• Promise to honor voidable contract made in
  infancy.
             Mills v. Wyman
• What are the exceptions covered by the end
  of this statement?
• Promise to pay debt barred by statute of
  limitations
• Promise to pay debt discharged in bankruptcy
• Promise to honor voidable contract made in
  infancy.
• Some statutes regulate these in other ways
  (require writing and revocation period)
   Note on the Law of Restitution
• There are causes of action for benefits
  conferred in special circumstances (doctor
  treating road accident victim). The benefit
  must not have been conferred gratuitously or
  unreasonably.
• Parents are liable for the obligations (including
  restitution) of minor children.
               Problem 48
• Coach asks Al to do emergency repair work on
  car.
• After work is done Coach promises to pay
  $200 for the work. Al accepts.
• Al has always charged Coach for work in the
  past.
• Coach decides it is only worth $100 and
  refuses to pay $200.
• If Al sues how much should he win?
                Problem 48
• Is this a restitution claim?
• What is the consideration for the promsie to
  pay $200?
            Webb v. McGowen
“(1) That on August 3, 1925, appellant saved J.
Greeley McGowin, appellee’s testator, from death
or grievous bodily harm; (2) that in doing so
appellant sustained bodily injury crippling him for
life; (3) that in consideration of the services
rendered and the injuries received by appellant,
McGowin agreed to care for him the remainder of
appellant’s life, the amount to be paid being $15
every two weeks; (4) that McGowin complied with
this agreement until he died.”
             Webb v. McGowen
“(1) It states no cause of action; (2) its averments
  show the contract was without consideration; (3) it
  fails to allege that McGowin had, at or before the
  services were rendered, agreed to pay appellant for
  them; (4) the contract declared on is void under the
  Statute of Frauds.”
             Webb v. McGowen
“Where the promisee cares for, improves, and
 preserves the property of the promisor, though
 done without his request, it is sufficient
 consideration for the promisor’s subsequent
 agreement to pay for the service, because of the
 material benefit received.
             Webb v. McGowen
• “It follows that if, as alleged in the complaint,
  appellant saved J. Greeley McGowin from death or
  grievous bodily harm, and McGowin subsequently
  agreed to pay him for the service rendered, it
  became a valid and enforceable contract.
2. It is well settled that a moral obligation is a
  sufficient consideration to support a subsequent
  promise to pay where the promisor has received a
  material benefit, although there was no original
  duty or liability resting on the promisor.
           Webb v. McGowen
1. Is this case distinguishable from Mills v.
  Wyman?
2. Would the case have been decided differently
  if McGowin had made no promise at all and
  had never made any payments?
             Problem 49
Mrs. Corney raised orphan Oliver. When he
was grown up he signed a contract to pay her
$50 a week in exchange for raising him. He
reneged. Her estate sues.
                Problem 50
• Decide Hays, Mills and Webb as if the
  Restatement §86 were the law.
       §86. PROMISE FOR BENEFIT RECEIVED
(1) A promise made in recognition of a benefit
  previously received by the promisor from the
  promisee is binding to the extent necessary to
  prevent injustice.
(2) A promise is not binding under Subsection
  (1)
(a) if the promisee conferred the benefit as a gift
  or for other reasons the promisor has not
  been unjustly enriched; or
(b) to the extent that its value is
  disproportionate to the benefit.

								
To top