John Harrington, Jr. (“Junior”) is a 24-year-old, 3-pack-per-day smoker. John Ha

Question

John Harrington, Jr. (“Junior”) is a 24-year-old, 3-pack-per-day smoker. John Harrington, Sr. (“Senior”) is a very concerned parent. On January 1, father announces to son, “Junior, if you will stop smoking for the entire year, I will pay you $5,000.” Senior believes that if Junior will stop smoking for one year, he will “kick the habit.” Junior reluctantly accepts his father’s terms, and extinguishes his half-smoked cigarette with the heel of his boot.

On January 1 of the following year, Junior approaches Senior and says “Dad, time to pay up.” Senior has no reason to doubt that Junior has refrained from smoking for an entire year, but states “Son, this was for your benefit. The gift I have given you is the gift of life, and you are now likely to enjoy that gift longer, because you are now much less likely to contract cancer. Health statistics show that non-smokers live ten years longer than smokers. Enjoy your newfound life, but I will not pay you the $5,000.”

Does Senior owe Junior the $5,000? Is there an enforceable contract between father and son? If there is not an enforceable contract, does Junior have any other legal or equitable theory of recovery?

Explanation / Answer

What has been described in the case is not a contract as there was no consideration. The senior made a promise to make a gift to the junior. The gift was conditional. It must be remembered that conditional gifts are not contractual obligations.

Ethically speaking, it is the duty of the father to pay the promised amount to his son. The junior can only ask his father to be fair and true to his word. This is the only form of recovery available to him.However, such an ethical obligation is not legally enforceable.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse J
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.