Washington Nat. Ins. Co. v. Cook

The proper decision of this ease, it, seems to me, in so far as the questions presented are dealt with in the majority opinion, is controlled by three more or less fundamental propositions of contract law. They may be stated thus: First, a promise in order to be legally binding must have been given in ear-change for a consideration. Second, only that is a consideration which is so regarded by the parties. Third, the payment of a sum of money in exchange for a promise is no consideration if the money was certainly and indisputably already due at the time the promise is made.

Properly the only…