Court Opinion

ID: 9935354
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-09 18:55:48.340624+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:27:19.735749
License: Public Domain

Legal consideration is an essential ingredient of any contract. Assets Realization Co. v. Ganus, 25 Ala. App. 113,141 So. 721 (1932). The agreement between the parties here had no substantial consideration. The plaintiff was under a duty, by virtue of a court order, to deed the house to the defendant. To induce this performance, the defendant proposed that if performance was made by August 9, 1976, then he would share the proceeds of the sale of the house with her. It is a well established principle that doing what one is already under a legal obligation to do is not sufficient consideration. Moorev. Williamson, 213 Ala. 274, 104 So. 645 (1925). While no consideration is needed for the modification of an executory contract, Winegardner v. Burns, 361 So.2d 1054 (Ala. 1978), this agreement was not a modification of a contract, but in fact a new agreement, subsequent to an order from the court, and thus required substantial legal consideration. The defendant here received no consideration. For this reason, I concur in reversing the trial court's decision awarding Carolyn Holland Dickerson half of the proceeds from the sale of the property
ALMON, J., concurs