Wolfe v. Breman
Citation | 26 S.E.2d 633,69 Ga.App. 813 |
Decision Date | 05 July 1943 |
Docket Number | 29939. |
Parties | WOLFE v. BREMAN. |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Rehearing Granted July 22, 1943.
Judgment Adhered to July 31, 1943.
Syllabus by the Court. [Copyrighted Material Omitted]
The petition of Mrs. Breman alleged that her husband died leaving a will, one of the provisions of which (item 2 of the codicil) was as follows: "So long as my wife survives me and remains a widow it is my will and desire that she have the benefit of the installments arising from the conversion of $30,000 of my life insurance into 20 installments certain." She also alleged that she was orally advised by the executors of said will that they were unable to convert the $30,000 of the testator's life insurance in accordance with the provisions of Item 2 of the codicil to said will, and in lieu thereof intended to purchase an annuity, and that she was at that time advised by her counsel that the purchase of an annuity, not being in compliance with the terms of said will, could be blocked or prevented by her should she so desire; '
A. S. Grove, of Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.
MacDougald, Troutman & Arkwright and W. H. Schroder, all of Atlanta, for defendant in error.
1. The defendant contends that there was no consideration for his agreement to pay the plaintiff the $600 in question. Austell v. Rice, 5 Ga. 472 (2) (3).
It is not essential that the person to whom the consideration moves should be benefited, provided the person from whom it moves is in a legal sense injured. The injuries may consist of a compromise of a disputed claim which is not necessarily a valid claim, but a compromise of a bona fide controversy (the good faith is generally a question for the jury), or forbearance to exercise a legal right; the alteration in position being regarded as a detriment that forms a consideration independent of the actual value of the right forborne. Hume v. Davison-Paxon Co. 57 Ga.App. 289, 292, 195 S.E. 318.
The widow, Mrs. Breman, alleges that the final settlement and compromise by which she withdrew her objections in her intervention, in which she contended that the annuity during her life, or so long as she remained a widow, was not in compliance with her husband's will that she was to have "installments arising from the conversion of $30,000 of life insurance into 20 installments certain," was done at the request of the defendant, and that she did not seek to have the executors purchase the annuity in the Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York, which she was very anxious for them to do because she had been associated with that company for over 16 years; that she did not oppose the executors purchasing from the defendant, as agent of the Union Central Life Insurance Company, which was, in so far as she was concerned, an annuity during her life or so long as she remained a widow. All of which was done at the request of the defendant.
She further alleged that said annuity was accordingly purchased from the Union Central Life Insurance Company through the defendant's agency. The defendant acknowledged in writing his previous promise to pay petitioner $600. All of this together, we think, was a forbearance of a legal right by the widow, and constituted a consideration to support the promise by him to pay the $600. Rector, etc., of St. Mark's Church v. Teed, 120 N.Y. 583, 24 N.E. 1014, 1015. The consideration consisted in the forbearance of the widow to exercise a legal right, or at least what she bona fide believed to be a legal right, to insist that the executors purchase for her the "20 installments certain," as directed in her husband's will and accept instead an annuity for life, or widowhood. And we might say that the alteration in position of the widow, by accepting as a compromise said annuity having in effect been alleged as a detriment, would form a consideration independent of the actual value of the right forborne. Rector, etc., of St. Mark's Church v. Teed, supra. Whether the widow would have succeeded in the litigation by having her intervention sustained is not the test. It is enough that she yielded the right she had to contest the right to receive from her husband's estate "the 20 installments certain" as directed in his will. The consideration, even if it did not rest upon any advantage to the defendant, but only upon the abandonment by the widow of her position as a contestant, would, nevertheless, be sufficient, for she had relinquished what s...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Abdulla v. Klosinski
...entitled to do, of almost any character, will be sufficient....” 3 Williston on Contracts § 7:45 (4th ed.); see also Wolfe v. Breman, 69 Ga.App. 813, 26 S.E.2d 633 (1943) (“Forbearance to prosecute a legal claim, and the compromise of a doubtful right, are both sufficient considerations to ......
-
State v. Fed. Def. Program
...whom the consideration moves should be benefited, provided the person from whom it moves is in a legal sense injured." Wolfe v. Breman, 69 Ga.App. 813, 817 (26 S.E.2d 633) (1943). "[F]orbearance to exercise a legal right" is sufficient consideration to support a contract, "the alteration in......
-
San Miguel Produce, Inc. v. L.G. Herndon Jr. Farms, Inc.
...237 Ga.App. 71, 514 S.E.2d 241, 243 (1999) ("Slight consideration is sufficient to sustain a contract.") (citing Wolfe v. Breman, 69 Ga.App. 813, 26 S.E.2d 633, 635 (1943) ). Because San Miguel had an obligation with regard to the produce that Herndon Farms delivered (and the delivered prod......
-
Jefferson Ins. Co. of New York v. Dunn, A96A2440
... ... OCGA §§ 13-3-41, 13-3-42(c)(2). See also Wolfe v. Breman, 69 Ga.App. 813, 816(1), 817, 26 S.E.2d 633. Consequently, Jefferson's contention that, in order to make out a case of delaying or ... ...