ProfessorMelissa A. Hale
CaseCast™ – "What you need to know"
Brief Fact Summary. P sued D for payment on a promissory note endorsed by D.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. A creditor’s promise to forbear the collection of a debt “until such time as I want my money” is illusory and the agreement is not enforceable against either party.
Issue. Did P’s promise to forbear impose a duty upon him?
Held. No. Judgment for D affirmed.
An agreement by a creditor to forbear the collection of a debt presently due is a good consideration for an absolute or conditional promise of a third person to pay the debt. However, in this case, the note did not legally extend the payment of the debt.
P’s promise to forbear collection of a debt payable on demand imposed no duty on P to forbear and was not a consideration for D’s promise to pay if her husband did not. There was no agreement to forbear for a fixed time or a reasonable time, but an agreement for such a time as P should elect. Nothing prevented P from an immediate suit on the note. P’s promise was illusory and either party could enforce the agreement.
There is no doubt that an agreement by the creditor to forbear the collection of a debt presently due is a good consideration for an absolute or conditional promise of a third person to pay the debt, or for any obligation he may assume in respect thereto.View Full Point of Law