Fiege v. Boehm – Case Brief Summary
Summary of Fiege v. Boehm, 210 Md. 352, 123 A.2d 316 (Md. 1956).
Facts
Boehm (P) became pregnant and believed in good faith that Fiege (D) was the father. Fiege promised to pay Boehm for the birth expenses and make support payments for the raising of the child as long as Boehm would not institute criminal bastardy proceedings against him. Fiege made payments under the agreement but stopped when blood tests revealed that he could not be the father. Boehm initiated criminal bastardy proceedings and Fiege was acquitted because the blood tests revealed that he could not have been the father. Boehm then sued to enforce the agreement for support in civil court. Fiege appealed the jury’s verdict in favor of Boehm.
Issue
Can forbearance from asserting a good faith legal claim be sufficient to constitute valid consideration?
Holding and Rule
Yes. Forbearance from asserting a good faith legal claim can be valid consideration.
Forbearance from asserting a legal claim known to be invalid is not valuable consideration. To be valid consideration, the claimant must subjectively believe in good faith that the claim is valid, and that belief must be reasonable from the standpoint of a reasonable person in the position of the claimant.
Disposition
Affirmed.
Notes
The majority rule requires a good faith belief as determined by an objective reasonable person standard. The minority rule allows a good faith subjective belief to satisfy the requirements of consideration even if that belief is not reasonable.
This case is frequently cited incorrectly as Feige v. Boehm.
See Wood v. Lucy, Lady Duff-Gordon for a law school contracts case brief holding that where the intent to contract is clearly intended by the parties, the duty of good faith can avoid invalidation of the contract based on vagueness of a material term.