Strong v. Sheffield – Case Brief
Strong v. Sheffield, 144 N.Y. 392, 39 N.E. 330 (1895).
Facts: Sheffield (D) endorsed and delivered a promissory note to Strong (P) as security for a debt owed by Sheffield’s husband to Strong. The only consideration Sheffield received was an agreement to forbear the debt for an indefinite period of time. Strong told Sheffield “I will hold it until such time as I want my money, I will make a demand on you for it.”
P demanded payment two years later and D was unable to pay the note. P sued and the trial court entered judgment for P. On appeal the court reversed and P appealed.
Issue: Is a promise illusory if one party’s performance is entirely at the option of that party?
Holding and Rule: Yes. A promise is illusory if a party’s performance of that promise is entirely at the option of that party.
In order to be enforceable a contract must be supported by consideration. In order to serve as valid consideration, forbearance must be either absolute or for a definite time, or for a reasonable time. Forbearance for a little, or for some time, is not sufficient. The only qualification is that in the absence of a specified time a reasonable time is deemed to have been intended.
The promissory note under these circumstances did not extend payment of the debt. It was payable at any time on demand. There was no agreement to forbear for a fixed or reasonable period of time; it was at P’s discretion. If P had made a demand immediately, his promise to forbear would have been satisfied under the terms of the agreement.
Consideration must be determined by the agreement itself, not by what actually transpires.
Disposition: Affirmed; Judgment for D.