Opinion ID: 2621732
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: There was consideration for the release.

Text: Moore argues that she did not receive any consideration in return for her release. She contends that the $50 rebate promised by the salesperson upon completion of the course [7] was to have been the consideration for her release of liability. Because Moore did not complete the course, she did not receive the $50 rebate. [8] She asserts that since she did not receive any consideration for the release, it was not effective to protect the defendants from liability. Moore misconstrues the role of consideration by equating inducement with consideration. Here ATVSI provided consideration for the release, not by offering a $50 rebate, but by offering participation in the class. Thus, even if the $50 rebate induced Moore to take the class, the only reasonable inference from the facts presented is that Moore exchanged the release of liability for participation in the program. Whether Moore considered the $50 rebate her inducement is immaterial to the sufficiency of consideration. [9] The trial court did not err in rejecting Moore's claim that the release was invalid for failure of consideration.