ContractsProf Blog

Editor: D. A. Jeremy Telman
Valparaiso Univ. Law School

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Friday, February 29, 2008

Oman's Random Thoughts on Consideration

Nate Oman (William & Mary) asks: why bother with consideration to determine which promises are enforceable?  He argues: why not enforce all promises, no matter how trivial, and let litigation costs serve as the gatekeeper for which promises get enforced - it simply isn't worth the expense of seeking to enforce trivial claims (like the broken promise to have lunch).  Interesting thoughts.  But, what about the justification of consideration as a recognition of the solemnity of making the promise?  I realize that consideration often does not serve this stated purpose (especially not a mere peppercorn); however, to the extent non-trivial (high value) promises would be binding in court regardless of consideration, shouldn't the law have some mechanism to give the promisor pause?  Bring back the seal!?!

[Meredith R. Miller]

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/contractsprof_blog/2008/02/omans-random-th.html

Commentary | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef00e550a1034f8834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Oman's Random Thoughts on Consideration: