ann vs. barry???

Question

ann owed 500 to barry for services barry rendered to ann. the debt was due june 30, 1996. in march 1997, the debt was still unpaid, barry was in urgent need of cash and told ann that if she would pay 150 of the debt at once, barry would release her from the balance. ann paid the 150. in august 1997, barry demanded the unpaid balance and sued ann for 350.

who would win and why???

Also, second part: assume the same facts for 2 except that the 500 was owed to barry due to ann's purchase of of a motorcycle from barry.

Answer 1

Barry
because there was no valid consideration for the recision
the preexisting duty rule applies to a valid contract for services, but not for the transfer of consumer goods. So your second example of the motorcycle would fall under that.

The statute of frauds would not apply regardless because services were already rendered. The doctrine of quantum meruit would apply. A court sitting in equity would not permit unjust enrichment on the part of Ann for escaping her debt. Barry's original claim against Ann would hold up because she received the benefit of his services under the doctrine of quantum meruit.

This fact pattern is identical to a case we had last year, perhaps another could name the case and trump me as best answer, as I am without my first year notes at the moment.

Answer 2

In English law Barry would win (whether or not it was for a motorcycle) - the reason for this is that there was no consideration for his agreement to forego the rest of the money. It's therefore not a binding contract, and the original debt stands.

If there was some sort of dispute, for example over the quality of the services or the motorcycle, then the agreement might be a binding agreement.

If you do a search for this, try the phrase "fresh consideration".

Answer 3

Statute of Frauds does not apply to contracts between people who are not normally engaged in the business of selling motorcycles or making loans.

Assuming the above facts are proven in court, Barry would lose his case in both matters. The original contract for the debt of $500.00 was altered by both parties AND new consideration was given by both parties. The consideration was Ann would pay $150.00 and Barry would release her from the balance. This Consideration effectively alters the original Contract.

Answer 4

Barry would win.
Statute of Frauds - there was no written agreement. (agreements in excess of $500 must be in writing)