Angel v. Muuray Facts: Mahr went into a contract to be paid money for picking up waste in the city of Newport. There was a drastic increase in housing that was unforeseen and more expensive. Two times Mahr went to the city council, asked for more money, and was granted the request. The P now sues to recover the money because they felt that Mahr already had a pre-existing duty to perform. Issues: Did Mahr original contract give him an existing duty to all unforeseen cisumstances? Holding: No Reasoning: Courts have been reluctant to apply the pre-existing duty rule to situations where there are unforeseen or unanticipated encounters. In this case it seemed legitimate that Mahr did not know of the additional units. He asked the city and they agreed. The modification of eth contract was supported by all parties. Rule: A modification of a contract can be enforced if: (1) the promise modifying the contract was made before the contract was fully performed; (2) the underlying circumstances which prompted the new contract were unforeseen; (3) the modification is fair. Ruble Forrest Products, Inc v. Lance Mobile Homes of Oregon Facts: P is a lumber broker. D order lumber from P. o P sent 11 truck loads for appx. 30K. o P called D and complained about payment o D said some of the wood was defective. (1 st notice to P of defect). P gave D a 2500$ credit. P wanted the balance of the credit. P claims to not have given it because he never delivered defective wood and never heard about it. The court came to the conclusion that there was some settlement reached. The P now says that it should not have been a contract because there was no consideration. P uses the rule that an agreement to take less than what was originally offered is without consideration and not enforceable. The court ruled that an agreement between two parties of a settlement of a bona fide controversy can be binding if done in good faith and with full knowledge of all the facts. P says that there was not a good faith agreement because D did not pay to coerce the P to make a settlement. The court ruled that this was untrue and that there was a controversy. Dyer v. National By Products Facts: P was hurt on the job and lost a leg. When he got back he made a deal not to sue in foe lifetime employment. He went back to work and was fired soon after. P argues that he had an oral agreement or contract. His forbearance was his consideration.
Issue: Can someone forebare based upon an illegitimate claim? Further: in this case the P thought that by not suing he had consideration, however he did not have a claim anyway and so his forbearance was ill-founded. Professor Corbin “the fact that a claim is ill-founded is not itself enough to prevent forbarnces form being consideration.” he does not even have to believe that he would even win.