FACTS D Sidney was the executor for client W.E. Story who promised to pay W.E.

Story II P assignor Hamer - 5,000 if he stopped using liquor, tobacco, swearing, or playing cards until he was 21

Hamer v. Sidway 1891 At a wedding WES agreed to pay WES2 5,000 Upon turning 21 WES2 wrote to WES saying he fulfilled his promise WES agreed that the money was his, but he will hold on to it with interest for safe keeping WES2 agreed WES died 12 years later never paying WES2 WES2 assigned this money to his wife who assigned it to D Sidney WES executor refused to pay Sidney on grounds that there was no consideration nor did he suffer and detriment

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Trial court went in favor of P D appealed

ISSUE

Whether by virtue of a contract D testator WES became indebted to his nephew WES2 on his 21 birthday in the sum of 5,000 Defendant contends that without consideration there was no contract

HOLDING

Rule: consideration is defined as follows see pg 73

JUDGMENT

Order appealed from reversed and judgment affirmed on special terms Declaration of Trust Trust not contract

REASONING

By virtue of the letter from the uncle, this was a trust held by the uncle for the nephew