GA Code § 13-3-41 (2021)
2021 Georgia Code|Title 13 - Contracts|Chapter 3 - Elements and Formation Generally|Article 3 - Consideration|§ 13-3-41. Types of Consideration

 Considerations are distinguished into "good" and "valuable." A good consideration is such as is founded on natural duty and affection or on a strong moral obligation. A valuable consideration is founded on money or something convertible into money or having a value in money, except marriage, which is a valuable consideration.   (Orig. Code 1863, § 2705; Code 1868, § 2699; Code 1873, § 2741; Code 1882, § 2741; Civil Code 1895, § 3658; Civil Code 1910, § 4243; Code 1933, § 20-303.)   Cross references.   - Additional provisions relating to marriage as valuable consideration, § 19-3-60.   Law reviews.   - For article discussing the anachronistic nature of the Georgia contracts Code as dramatized by comparing the doctrine of consideration as it is formulated in the Restatements of Contracts and in Code 1933, Title 20 (now this title), and the interpretative approach Georgia courts have taken in dealing with such Code, see 13 Ga. L. Rev. 499 (1979). (But see amendments by Ga. L. 1981, p. 876.) For comment on property interest of inventor as valuable consideration, in light of Alexis, Inc. v. Werbell, 209 Ga. 665, 75 S.E.2d 168 (1953), see 5 Mercer L. Rev. 208 (1953).   JUDICIAL DECISIONS   Every executory contract must be supported by valuable or good consideration.    - It is the general rule that, in order to be enforceable, every executory contract must be supported by valuable consideration, or, in absence of valuable consideration, by good consideration founded either on love and affection toward one to whom a natural duty exists, or on strong moral obligation supported either by some antecedent legal obligation, though unenforceable, at the time, or by some present equitable duty. Trustees of Jesse Parker Williams Hosp. v. Nisbet, 189 Ga. 807, 7 S.E.2d 737 (1940).    In the plaintiff's suit on a promissory note, partial summary judgment was granted to the defendant as the note failed for want of consideration because the plaintiff's purported agreement to rescind the plaintiff's request to be named on the deed did not constitute valuable consideration to support the note as the plaintiff testified that it was merely the plaintiff's supposition that the defendant agreed to sign the note instead of naming the plaintiff on the deed; the note specifically purported to establish that the consideration was the money the plaintiff gave the defendant for the down payment and the repairs; and any consideration for the note was limited to the purported monetary consideration recited in the note. Lewis v. Ikner, 349 Ga. App. 21, 825 S.E.2d 443 (2019).    In the plaintiff's suit on a promissory note, partial summary judgment was granted to the defendant as the note failed for want of consideration because the plaintiff could not rely on any prior or contemporaneous oral agreement that the down payment money was subject to certain conditions as the transfer of the down payment money was memorialized in the gift letter, which stated that the defendant was under no obligation to repay the plaintiff and that the gift was subject to no terms or conditions; there was no consideration for any subsequent agreement for the defendant to repay the plaintiff; and the termite repairs money could not be deemed valuable consideration as it was past consideration. Lewis v. Ikner, 349 Ga. App. 21, 825 S.E.2d 443 (2019).    Executory contract, founded on no consideration, either good or valuable, is nudum pactum and unenforceable. Georgia Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Hardrick, 211 Ga. 709, 88 S.E.2d 394 (1955).    Alleged contract on which there is no firm agreement as to consideration is unenforceable. Venable v. Block, 138 Ga. App. 215, 225 S.E.2d 755 (1976).   When consideration admitted although parties disagree on specific amount, contract enforceable.    - Contract is enforceable where consideration is admitted and there is disagreement only as to whether there was common agreement as to specific amount of consideration in parol contract. Venable v. Block, 138 Ga. App. 215, 225 S.E.2d 755 (1976).    In contract between attorney and client for commissions, oral exchange of promises is sufficient consideration, and fact that promises were based on contingency will not affect validity as consideration. Venable v. Block, 138 Ga. App. 215, 225 S.E.2d 755 (1976).    Marriage is valuable consideration and will support contract made in consideration thereof. Vason v. Bell, 53 Ga. 416 (1874); Beall v. Clark, 71 Ga. 818 (1883).   Wife as purchaser for value as to property settled upon her in consideration of marriage.    - Marriage is valuable consideration, and wife stands, as to property of husband settled upon her by marriage contract, as other purchasers for value. Sheridan v. Sheridan, 153 Ga. 262, 111 S.E. 906 (1922). And see Nally v. Nally, 74 Ga. 669, 58 Am. R. 458 (1885); Bell v. Sappington, 111 Ga. 391, 36 S.E. 780 (1900).   What constitutes good consideration.    - See Cannon v. Williams, 194 Ga. 808, 22 S.E.2d 838 (1942); Hobbs v. Clark, 221 Ga. 558, 146 S.E.2d 271 (1965); Waters v. Lanier, 116 Ga. App. 471, 157 S.E.2d 796 (1967).    Good consideration is founded upon some antecedent legal obligation, although unenforceable at the time. Waters v. Lanier, 116 Ga. App. 471, 157 S.E.2d 796 (1967).   Assignment to bank of future periodic proceeds.    - For discussion of status (legal or equitable) of assignment to bank of specific amount from future periodic proceeds and consideration required for such an assignment, see Bank of Cave Spring v. Gold Kist, Inc., 173 Ga. App. 679, 327 S.E.2d 800 (1985).    Natural duty and affection is as good a basis for consideration as strong moral obligation. Worth v. Daniel, 1 Ga. App. 15, 57 S.E. 898 (1907).    Natural affection is such as naturally subsists between near relatives as father and child, brother and sister, husband and wife. This is regarded in law as a good consideration. Worth v. Daniel, 1 Ga. App. 15, 57 S.E. 898 (1907).   Affection and sense of duty towards aged, dependent parent is good consideration.    - Affection and sense of duty which should naturally exist on part of child towards aged and dependent parent is good consideration to support contract making provisions for a parent's support. Worth v. Daniel, 1 Ga. App. 15, 57 S.E. 898 (1907).    Parties' natural love and affection for each other provided adequate and good consideration in support of an option contract executed for "ten dollars and other valuable consideration," even though the ten dollars recited was not paid. Warthen v. Moore, 258 Ga. 198, 366 S.E.2d 666 (1988).    In the plaintiff's suit on a promissory note, partial summary judgment was granted to the defendant as the note failed for want of consideration because, while the note stated that it was supported by a good and valuable consideration, it then specified that the consideration consisted of the money the plaintiff extended to the defendant for the down payment and repairs; thus, because the note specified a monetary or valuable consideration, the plaintiff could not rely on a good consideration that was founded on natural duty and affection or on a strong moral obligation to provide the plaintiff, the defendant's elderly mother, a residence at the house or repay the plaintiff the money to help the plaintiff buy a house of the plaintiff's own. Lewis v. Ikner, 349 Ga. App. 21, 825 S.E.2d 443 (2019).   Love and affection for deceased not consideration for executory promise to pay estate's obligation.    - Mere love and affection, or moral obligation alone to pay debt of deceased person who left no estate will not support promissory note for amount of debt. Brazell v. Hearn, 33 Ga. App. 490, 127 S.E. 479 (1925).    Mere sentiment, love, and affection, or respect for memory of deceased husband, by his widow, will not support executory promise on her part to assume payment of obligation due by his estate. McCowen v. McCord, 49 Ga. App. 358, 175 S.E. 593 (1934).    Courts cannot enforce promises binding on the conscience, unless some pecuniary damage flows from breach, or where, in addition to moral obligation, promise is also supported by legal consideration. Davis & Co. v. Morgan, 117 Ga. 504, 43 S.E. 732, 97 Am. St. R. 171, 61 L.R.A. 148 (1903).    Law does not relate to moral obligation inherent in every promise. Worth v. Daniel, 1 Ga. App. 15, 57 S.E. 898 (1907).    On facts, moral obligation provided consideration for promised payment for past services. Gray v. Hamil, 82 Ga. 375, 10 S.E. 205, 6 L.R.A. 72 (1889).    Cited in McElven v. A.M. Sloan & Co., 56 Ga. 208 (1876); Dicks v. Andrews, 129 Ga. 756, 59 S.E. 782 (1907); Monroe v. Martin, 137 Ga. 262, 73 S.E. 341 (1911); Helmer v. Helmer, 159 Ga. 376, 125 S.E. 849, 37 A.L.R. 1137 (1924); Ayer v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 182 Ga. 765, 187 S.E. 27 (1936), overruled on other grounds, Worthen v. State, 2019 Ga. LEXIS 22 (Ga. 2019); Sinclair Ref. Co. v. Reid, 60 Ga. App. 119, 3 S.E.2d 121 (1939); Moore v. Moore, 188 Ga. 314, 4 S.E.2d 18 (1939); Taylor v. Cureton, 196 Ga. 28, 25 S.E.2d 815 (1943); Avary v. Avary, 202 Ga. 22, 41 S.E.2d 314 (1947); Summers v. Allison, 127 Ga. App. 217, 193 S.E.2d 177 (1972); Norris v. Cady, 231 Ga. 19, 200 S.E.2d 102 (1973); Worthington v. Worthington, 250 Ga. 730, 301 S.E.2d 44 (1983); Tidwell v. Galbreath, 207 Bankr. 309 (Bankr. M.D. Ga. 1997).   RESEARCH REFERENCES   Am. Jur. 2d.   - 17 Am. Jur. 2d, Contracts, §§ 85, 95, 106.   C.J.S.   - 17 C.J.S., Contracts, §§ 92, 97, 129, 180, 266. 17A C.J.S., Contracts, § 536.   ALR.   - Remedies during promisor's lifetime on contract to convey or will property at death in consideration of support or services, 7 A.L.R.2d 1166.   Moral obligation as consideration for contract - modern trend, 8 A.L.R.2d 787.   Extension of time or forbearance to sue as consideration constituting mortgagee bona fide purchaser, 39 A.L.R.2d 1088.   Forbearance as sufficient consideration for guaranty, 78 A.L.R.2d 1414.   Right to follow chattel into hands of purchaser who took in payment of preexisting debt, 11 A.L.R.3d 1028.   Sufficiency of consideration for employee stock-option contract, 57 A.L.R.3d 1241.   Enforceability of voluntary promise of additional compensation because of unforeseen difficulties in performance of existing contract, 85 A.L.R.3d 259.