A mechanic completes tractor repairs for $2,000. The farmer pays $1,000 and promises to pay the remaining $1,000 by June 1 if the mechanic agrees not to sue. The farmer's promise lacks consideration because the mechanic had a preexisting duty. Which option is correct?

• A. Yes, because forbearance to sue is always consideration.
• B. No, because there is no new consideration to support the promise.
• C. Yes, because the farmer's promise to pay later is consideration.
• D. No, because modification can be valid without consideration.

Answer: (B)

Consideration is the bargained-for exchange that makes a promise enforceable. Forbearance to sue can count as consideration only if there is a genuine dispute about the claim or some new value exchanged beyond what was already owed.

Here, the farmer wants to pay the remaining $1,000 by delaying payment in exchange for the mechanic not to sue. The mechanic had a preexisting duty to complete the repairs, and the full amount owed ($2,000) is not in dispute—the agreement from the start was to pay for the work already done. Since there is no new bargain or additional consideration beyond the original obligation, the promise not to sue lacks consideration. Therefore the farmer’s promise to pay later isn’t enforceable as a separate agreement, and the original contract remains the basis for payment.