Raymond P. Wirth signed a pledge agreement that stated that in consideration of his interest in education, and “intending to be legally bound,” he irrevocably pledged and promised to pay Drexel University the sum of $ 150,000. The pledge agreement provided that an endowed scholarship would be created in Wirth’s name. Wirth died two months after signing the pledge but before any money had been paid to Drexel. When the estate of Wirth refused to honor the pledge, Drexel sued the estate to collect the $ 150,000. The administrators of the estate alleged that the pledge was unenforceable because of lack of consideration. The surrogate court denied Drexel’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed Drexel’s claim against the estate. Drexel appealed. Did the administrators of the estate of Wirth act ethically by refusing to honor Mr. Wirth’s pledge? Was the pledge agreement supported by consideration and therefore enforceable against the estate of Wirth? In the Matter of Wirth, 14 A. D. 3d 572, 789 N. Y. S. 2d 69, 2005 N. Y. App. Div. Lexis 424 (Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, 2005)

  • CreatedAugust 12, 2015
  • Files Included
Post your question