Strong v. Sheffield


–          Judgment for plaintiff was reversed.

–          A promissory note (financial transaction) was made by defendant’s husband for a debt…She endorsed it by his request and delivered it to Strong.

–          The debt of the husband was past due at the time.

–          Only consideration by wife was that there was an agreement between the plaintiff and her for a request of forbearance on the collection of the debt (about two years).

Procedural History

–          Judgment for plaintiff in trial court.

–          It was revered in by the general Supreme Court in favor of defendant?

–          Court of appeals, 1895.


–          In regards to forbearance, was there any act of consideration on behalf of the defendant?


–          No.


–          There was no act of forbearance per say…The agreement to extend, the intended forbearance was not an act of consideration, but a formulaic approach to loaning money and debts.


–          This was not a request for forbearance….It is GENERALLY understood that when your loaning money, you do not pay back immediately.

–          Even though it was two years, it is generally accepted that the person in debt won’t pay back for quite sometime.

–          No “fixed” time to forebear on behalf of the defendant.


–          Affirmed in favor of defendant.


–          No bargain for exchange

–          No specific time table for debt to be paid back

–          To broad to enforce

–          It would hurt the marketplace.

Comments are closed.