JJDancer wrote:Since you guys are so awesome, K clarification please!
I always forget the rule about
family context, is the person asking getting a benefit rule - lol I can't even remember what it is about right now..conditions maybe?
Can someone please remind me of that rule/those considerations? Thanks!
I'm not 100% sure what you're referencing, but if you mean is there a benefit of the bargain between family members making a contract or potentially gratuitous gift I think it goes like this:
- regardless of family context, if there is a promise to perform from A where the party refrains from doing something they have a legal right to do (like drink or smoke) or doing something they're compelled to based on the return promise (like putting effort in to get all A's in school) and family member B promises money/trip/whatever in return, that's a valid K. The court won't look into the black box of consideration to determine if family member B actually got some "benefit" and won't rule it not supported by consideration even if family member A actually gets some "benefit" in teh form of a good GPA or healthy liver.
- if there's a promise that could be considered gratuitous or donative and the courts are having to decide which it is, courts are more likely to read it as gratuitous/donative if between family members, and more likely to read it as a contract supported by valid consideration if between two non-family members/close friends. But these are rebuttable by evidence to the contrary of the intent of the promisor/promisee