Criswell v. E.M. Roberts, 789 F.3d 123 (9th Cir. 2023)
Criswell v. E.M.
Does a modification to a contract that includes an expedited delivery promise meet the legal requirements of consideration, thus forming a binding agreement?
For a contract modification to be enforceable, it must be supported by new consideration — that is, something of value must be exchanged that was not already obligated under the original contract.
The court held that the contract modification lacked the necessary consideration and thus was unenforceable. The promise to expedite delivery did not constitute new consideration because it fell within the pre-existing duty Criswell owed under the original agreement.
This case is significant for its reinforcement of the pre-existing duty rule in contract modifications. It underscores the necessity for new consideration in contractual amendments, serving as a crucial reminder for parties involved in contractual negotiations. Law students benefit from understanding how this rule operates as a barrier to arbitrary changes in obligations, providing stability and predictability in contract law.