Bilateral treaty: A contract in which the parties exchange a promise for a promise. But when John tells Doris that he will pay her $3,000 to care for her children for the summer, and Doris gives up her health insurance because she expects John to cover her, her hypothesis is not based on a promise from John. As a result, Doris cannot get compensation from John for his increased medical expenses. Evidence – When an accused has been arrested, he is often led to make a confession as a result of promises made to him that if he tells the truth, he will either be rejected or preferred: in such a case, the proof of confession cannot be received, since it is obtained by the flattery of hope, it comes in such a questionable form, if it is to be considered as proof of guilt that it should not be credited. That is the principle, but what amounts to a promise is not so easy to define. Now think about why people make promises. Why not just do the act? Why talk about it first? (3) The person to whom the demonstration is addressed is the one promised. 4. Reciprocity – The parties had “a meeting of minds” about the agreement. This means that the parties have understood and agreed on the basic content and terms of the contract. A promise may be made in words orally or in writing, or be derived in whole or in part from the conduct.
An agreement is a manifestation of the mutual consent of two or more persons. A good deal is an agreement to exchange promises or exchange a promise for an exchange service or services.  A mutual agreement or consent is, of course, essential to a valid contract, but the law attributes to a person an intention that corresponds to the reasonable meaning of his or her words and actions. If his words and actions, judged to a reasonable standard, manifest an intention to consent, it does not matter what state of mind is true but tacit. 17 S.J.C., Contracts, § 32, p. 361; 12 p.m. Jur., Contracts, § 19, p. 515. Fraud Act: The foundation of most modern laws that require certain promises to be made in writing to be enforceable; it was passed by the English Parliament in 1677. In the United States, although state laws vary, most require written agreements in five types of contracts: contracts to assume someone else`s obligation; contracts which cannot be performed within one year; contracts for the sale, lease or mortgage of land; contracts in exchange for marriage; and contracts for the sale of goods with a total value of $500 or more.
 She repeated on cross-examination that she was busy and not paying attention to what was happening. She was at a distance and only saw them signing the paper. Asked if she had seen Zehmer put the deal on the table before Lucy, and her response was, “It`s time for him to write down everything it was on paper, Mr. Lucy walked over and said, `Let`s see.` He took it and put it in his pocket before showing it to Mrs. Zehmer. Their version was that Lucy continued to increase her offer until she reached $50,000. Try to identify the essential elements or components of the legal meaning of the word “promise”. Can you draw a diagram to show how these elements relate to each other? Please note that Jerry does not exchange his promise to pay $500 for Ben`s promise to wash the car. Instead, Jerry exchanges his promise to pay $500 for Ben to actually wash the car. In addition, the exchange of a promise to share is also considered a valid consideration. For example, if a party makes a statement or promise that causes another party to rely on that statement in such a way that it is financially harmed by that trust, then a court will execute the statement or promise as if it were a contract in progress.
The court does not have to find an agreement or consideration to enforce the promise as a contract, but it is difficult to prove that a statement was made without being recorded. . The law therefore assesses an agreement between two persons solely on the basis of the expressions of their intentions communicated between them. A contract in which the parties exchange a promise for a promise is called a bilateral contract, while a contract in which one party makes a promise and the other party performs an action is called a unilateral contract. Unilateral contract: A contract in which one party makes a promise and the other party takes action. It has been said that an implied contract must in fact contain all the elements of an explicit contract. Such a contract therefore depends on mutual agreement or consent and the intention of the parties: and a meeting of opinions is required. An implied contract is, in fact, an agreement between the parties in all intentions and for any purpose, and it cannot be established that it exists unless a contractual status is indicated. Such a contract does not result from an implied legal obligation or obligation, but from facts from which consent can be derived; there must be a manifestation of consent resulting in whole or in part from acts other than words, and a contract cannot be effectively implied if the facts are incompatible with its existence.  The discussion that led to the signing of the deal, Lucy said, lasted thirty or forty minutes, during which Zehmer seemed doubtful that Lucy could raise $50,000. Lucy suggested the provision for the title to be investigated, and Zehmer suggested he would sell it “completely, all over there,” explaining that all he had on the farm was three heifers.
The existence of a consideration distinguishes a contract from a gift. A gift is a voluntary and unpaid transfer of property from one person to another, without any promise of value in return. Failure to keep a promise to donate is not enforceable as a breach of contract because there is no consideration for the promise. 3. Acceptance – The offer has been clearly accepted. Acceptance may be expressed by words, deeds or achievements as required by the contract. In general, acceptance must reflect the terms of the offer. If this is not the case, acceptance will be considered a rejection and counter-offer. The promisor is bound to keep his promise, unless it is illegal to steal as a promise or to commit an attack and battery; when fulfillment is prevented by the act of God, as if one had agreed to teach another drawing, and one loses one`s sight so as not to be able to teach it; when the promisor prevents him from doing what he has agreed to do; if the promisor has been released from his promise by the provocateur, if the promise was made without sufficient compensation; and perhaps, in other cases, the promiser`s duties are over.
Now read the following sections of the reformulation (second) and think about how the legal use of the term “promise” refers to our understanding of the word with common sense.  Thus, a person can only claim that he was joking if his conduct and words justified a reasonable person in believing that he intended to enter into a genuine agreement, 17 C.J.S., Contracts, § 47, at p. 390; Clark on Contracts, 4 ed., § 27, p. 54. It is natural to think about the relationship between contract law and the morality of promises and agreements. This chapter distinguishes between two ways of understanding this relationship. First, the moral obligations of the parties based on agreements could feed into the Contract Law Statement – a presentation of its functions or justifications. Contract law could be used to enforce the parties` first-rate performance obligations, to enforce second-rate redress obligations, to support the culture of entering into and maintaining agreements in general, or at least not to undermine that culture or people`s ability to act morally. Second, the contract can be understood as the legal analogue of the promise.
The contract and the promise allow people to make new commitments for each other if they wish. Each is a kind of normative power, one legal, the other moral. The chapter concludes by arguing that these two ways of thinking about contract law are not mutually exclusive. .