Of Agreement and Consideration

I have always been intrigued by contract law and not as it relates to employment.

One case in particular caught my eye as I surfed contract case law. It was a 1982 case brought before the Supreme Court of Tennessee, Alden v. Presley.

Elvis Presley, a singer of great renown and a man of substantial wealth, became engaged to Ginger Alden. He was generous with the Alden family, paying for landscaping the lawn, installing a swimming pool, and making other gifts. When his fiancee's mother, Jo LaVerne Alden, sought to divorce her husband, Presley promised to pay off the remaining mortgage indebtedness on the Alden home, which Mrs. Alden was to receive in the divorce settlement. On August 16, 1977, Presley died suddenly, leaving the mortgage unpaid. When the legal representative of Presley's estate refused to pay the almost $40,000 mortgage, Mrs. Alden brought an action to enforce Presley's promise. The trial court denied Mrs. Alden recovery; Mrs. Alden appealed.

The question before the court was this: was Presley's promise to pay the mortgage enforceable?

The answer, of course, was no. The supreme court held that Presley's promise was a gratuitous promise that was not supported by consideration. It was one-way. As such, it was unenforceable against Presley's estate. The court dismissed the case and assessed costs against Mrs. Alden.

Under contract law, gift promises are unenforceable because they lack consideration. The court found that Mrs. Alden had not given any consideration in exchange for Presley's promise. The court also found that the gift promise had not been completed by Presley. Therefore, the unexpected gift promise could not be enforced against Presley's estate.

Ladies and gentlemen - Elvis has left the building!