Opinion ID: 1683864
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: was the september 13 agreement supported by consideration?

Text: The master agreement, which was the parent of the September 13 agreement, clearly states that it was concluded in consideration of the premises and mutual advantages to be derived by the parties hereto... . The general rule is that consideration for a contract need not appear on the face of the instrument, but may be proved by extrinsic evidence. 17 C.J.S. Contracts § 73. See also Dabbs v. International Minerals & Chemical Corp., 339 F. Supp. 654, 661 (N.D. Miss. 1972). In this case, the existence of the master agreement in the record is sufficient evidence that the subsidiary agreement was supported by consideration, and the chancellor erred in holding otherwise.