Mills v. Wyman case brief summary
20 Mass. 207
SYNOPSIS:
Plaintiff good Samaritan appealed the decision of a court of common pleas (Massachusetts) issuing a judgment in favor of defendant parent in plaintiff's assumpsit action to cover compensation for the board, nursing, and care of defendant's son.
OVERVIEW: Plaintiff provided board, nursing, and care to defendant's adult son for a two week period after he returned from a voyage at sea poor, in distress, and sick. After plaintiff had finished caring for defendant's son, defendant wrote a letter promising to pay plaintiff for his expenses. When defendant did not pay as he promised, plaintiff sued. Plaintiff's complaint was dismissed for lack of consideration. Plaintiff appealed.
HOLDING:
The supreme court affirmed because there was no consideration for defendant's promise to pay plaintiff's expenses.
ANALYSIS:
-The kindness and services provided for defendant's son were not bestowed at defendant's request, and defendant was not legally obligated to support his son in any way.
-Thus, because defendant's son was an adult who was responsible for his own debts, any debt he incurred created no obligation upon defendant.
-Without consideration, defendant's promise founded upon such a debt had no legally binding force.
OUTCOME: The court affirmed the judgment because defendant's promise to pay expenses incurred for the care of his adult son was not supported by consideration because the services provided for defendant's son were not bestowed at defendant's request and defendant was not legally obligated to support his son in any way.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
-->
20 Mass. 207
SYNOPSIS:
Plaintiff good Samaritan appealed the decision of a court of common pleas (Massachusetts) issuing a judgment in favor of defendant parent in plaintiff's assumpsit action to cover compensation for the board, nursing, and care of defendant's son.
OVERVIEW: Plaintiff provided board, nursing, and care to defendant's adult son for a two week period after he returned from a voyage at sea poor, in distress, and sick. After plaintiff had finished caring for defendant's son, defendant wrote a letter promising to pay plaintiff for his expenses. When defendant did not pay as he promised, plaintiff sued. Plaintiff's complaint was dismissed for lack of consideration. Plaintiff appealed.
HOLDING:
The supreme court affirmed because there was no consideration for defendant's promise to pay plaintiff's expenses.
ANALYSIS:
-The kindness and services provided for defendant's son were not bestowed at defendant's request, and defendant was not legally obligated to support his son in any way.
-Thus, because defendant's son was an adult who was responsible for his own debts, any debt he incurred created no obligation upon defendant.
-Without consideration, defendant's promise founded upon such a debt had no legally binding force.
OUTCOME: The court affirmed the judgment because defendant's promise to pay expenses incurred for the care of his adult son was not supported by consideration because the services provided for defendant's son were not bestowed at defendant's request and defendant was not legally obligated to support his son in any way.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
-->
No comments:
Post a Comment