De Cicco v. Schweizer

De Cicco v. Schweizer, 117 N.E. 807 (N.Y. 1917) · New York Court of Appeals · November 13, 1917

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals held that a father's promise to pay his daughter an annuity after her marriage was enforceable because the marriage, though already planned, constituted sufficient consideration. The court reasoned that the promise was made to both the bride and groom and induced them to proceed with the marriage rather than rescind or delay it.

Court
New York Court of Appeals
Writing for the Court
Cardozo; Crane
Jurisdiction
New York
Decision date
November 13, 1917
Procedural posture
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, First Judicial Department, entered February 2, 1915, modifying and affirming as modified a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict directed by the court.
Standard of review
Because both sides moved for a directed verdict, the trial judge became the trier of fact; the appellate court reviews whether the evidence supports the verdict and whether the trial court's legal conclusions were correct.
Precedential value
Published
Parties
Schweizer v. De Cicco
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

considerationmarriagethird party beneficiarycontractsfamily law

Practice areas

ContractsFamily Law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether a promise by a father to pay an annuity to his daughter upon her marriage, made to the prospective husband and daughter, is supported by consideration when the parties were already engaged.

Holdings

  1. The promise is supported by consideration because it was made to both the husband and wife (or intended for both), and they were free to rescind or postpone the marriage; their performance in reliance on the promise constitutes a detriment.

Key quotations

Whereas, Miss Blanche Josephine Schweizer, daughter of said Mr. Joseph Schweizer and of said Mrs. Ernestine Teresa Schweizer, is now affianced to and is to be married to the above said Count Oberto Giacomo Giovanni Francesco Maria Gulinelli, Now, in consideration of all that is herein set forth the said Mr. Joseph Schweizer promises and expressly agrees by the present contract to pay annually to his said daughter Blanche, during his own life and to send her, during her lifetime, the sum of Two Thousand Five Hundred dollars, or the equivalent of said sum in Francs, the first payment of said amount to be made on the 20th day of January, 1902. (at 433)
If it is proved that the defendants with a view to induce the plaintiff to enter into a contract made a statement to the plaintiff of such a nature as would be likely to induce a person to enter into the contract, it is a fair inference of fact that he was induced to do so by the statement. (at 438)
One does not commonly pledge one's self to generosity in the language of a covenant. (at 439)

Factual background

On January 16, 1902, Joseph Schweizer and his wife executed articles of agreement with Count Oberto Gulinelli, who was engaged to their daughter Blanche. The agreement promised to pay Blanche $2,500 annually during Schweizer's life, in consideration of the marriage. The marriage occurred on January 20, 1902, and payments were made until 1912. This action seeks the 1912 installment. The plaintiff holds an assignment from Blanche and her husband. The question is whether the promise was supported by consideration.

Procedural history

The plaintiff brought an action to recover an installment of an annuity promised by the defendant. The trial court directed a verdict for the plaintiff. The Appellate Division modified and affirmed the judgment. The defendant appealed to the Court of Appeals.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…