In order for there to be consideration there must be:

Bargaining

A Choice

An exchange

Consideration must have a legal value- either a benefit or detriment

No consideration if there is a Pre-existing duty

Restatement 75

persuausion

If assent of one party is induced by improper threat by another party that leaves victim no other alternative  there is undue influence

Parties alternative can be dictated by the influencing party(spirtual advisor case)

Duress

Only covers:

physical coercion

or

economic threat

Not one of these probably not duress

The threat must be especially wrong it cannot be a threat that isnt so bad like divorce or leaving

5 instances where K must be in writing:

Sale of land interest

Sale of good >500

K that takes longer then 1 year to complete

consideration for marriage( prenup, ring etc)

Answering for the debt of another ( cosigner etc)

Minor can void a K for goods that are not essential goods

( medical supplies expenses etc)

Public Policy - unconscionable to have minor fulfill a contract

Exists to protect minors from adults and to protect them from themselves

Minor must return as much of consideratin still has in his possesion at time of disaffirmation

Did seller now or have reason to know of buyers mental incapacity (drugs drinking mental illness etc)

Other party must have noticed

Apply cognitve( brain ) or volitional (illness) test

Public Policy- if man does not have mental capacity to contract enforcing it is unconscionabl and against public policy

Misrepresentation is an asseration not in accord with the facts

Relevant untrue statemnts- party makes false statments

Relied upon - aggrevied party relies on fals information

Reasonable or justified- Partys reliance was justified

Ghost case and termite case

Key Idea - used to avoid injustice when lacks consideartin but when someone relied upon the promise

- no consideration

-promissor should have reaonsably expected reliance

- promisee did rely

-Must enforce to avoid injustice

Read Standish and Curry

Bank approved loan/ lost out on buyout

Abington v Dayton - Union workes relied on something that wasnt a promise verbal was not promise

Bilateral or mutual - no meeting of the minds - usually voidable - both partys thought different things

Unilateral- belief not in accord with the facts held by one party , no one has reason to know of the mistake ( 1 party mistaken)

Contract Bid Case- if you have notice of mistake and take no action then there is no mistake

merchant has duty to price things correct- merchant bears risk ( baseball card case)