Top Law Schools

If A loaned B $1,000 without interest, would you consider this a legal contract?

Or does it lack consideration?

I believe it lacks consideration. If A were to have received interest on the loan, then I could see it, but not here.

Certainly A could use an unjust enrichment theory or promissory estoppel theory.

I would appreciate your thoughts.

Cavalier-336 wrote:If A loaned B $1,000 without interest, would you consider this a legal contract?

Or does it lack consideration?

I believe it lacks consideration. If A were to have received interest on the loan, then I could see it, but not here.

Certainly A could use an unjust enrichment theory or promissory estoppel theory.

I would appreciate your thoughts.

I assume by "loan" you mean that B promises to repay the $1,000 at a later date. That promise to perform is the consideration A receives in exchange for $1,000. As long as the contract isn't unconscionable or void/voidable for some other reason, the law doesn't care about the "adequacy of consideration." Or maybe I'm misunderstanding and you're asking for an explanation as to why the adequacy of consideration isn't important...?

Cavalier-336 wrote:If A loaned B $1,000 without interest, would you consider this a legal contract?

Or does it lack consideration?

I believe it lacks consideration. If A were to have received interest on the loan, then I could see it, but not here.

Certainly A could use an unjust enrichment theory or promissory estoppel theory.

I would appreciate your thoughts.

Did you go to law school?

Cavalier-336 wrote:If A loaned B $1,000 without interest, would you consider this a legal contract?

Or does it lack consideration?

I believe it lacks consideration. If A were to have received interest on the loan, then I could see it, but not here.

Certainly A could use an unjust enrichment theory or promissory estoppel theory.

I would appreciate your thoughts.

Save this argument for when you start practicing:

I believe it lacks consideration. If A were to have received interest on the loan, then I could see it, but not here.

You made need it for a brief or a motion at some point in your career.

However, that will be a wrong answer choice on the bar exam.

Cavalier-336 wrote:If A loaned B $1,000 without interest, would you consider this a legal contract?

Or does it lack consideration?

I believe it lacks consideration. If A were to have received interest on the loan, then I could see it, but not here.

Certainly A could use an unjust enrichment theory or promissory estoppel theory.

I would appreciate your thoughts.

There is also the concept of carrying cost - holding onto the assets of another person is a valuable service

Bass wrote:

Cavalier-336 wrote:If A loaned B $1,000 without interest, would you consider this a legal contract?

Or does it lack consideration?

I believe it lacks consideration. If A were to have received interest on the loan, then I could see it, but not here.

Certainly A could use an unjust enrichment theory or promissory estoppel theory.

I would appreciate your thoughts.

There is also the concept of carrying cost - holding onto the assets of another person is a valuable service

there is a man who could solve this with one punch

TEIAM wrote:

Cavalier-336 wrote:If A loaned B $1,000 without interest, would you consider this a legal contract?

Or does it lack consideration?

I believe it lacks consideration. If A were to have received interest on the loan, then I could see it, but not here.

Certainly A could use an unjust enrichment theory or promissory estoppel theory.

I would appreciate your thoughts.

Did you go to law school?

My thought exactly.