Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 3/18/1975

Kay v. Kay

Citations

334 A.2d 585
460 Pa. 680
1975 Pa. LEXIS 717

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

noting that a clause which stated that appellant intends to be legally bound by the agreement constituted adequate consideration under Pennsylvania’s UWOA
finding that the statement in a spousal support agreement that “HUSBAND agrees to be legally bound.... HUSBAND further agrees and legally binds himself .... ” sufficiently stated the husband’s intention to be legally bound under the UWOA
finding a separation agreement that states the signer intends to be legally bound by the agreement is not rendered unenforceable by the absence of consideration
no consideration necessary for agreement containing words “Husband agrees to be legally bound . husband further agrees and legally binds himself . . . .”
“Under the Uniform Written Obligations Act ... the absence of consideration does not render the agreement unenforceable where [a statement of the intent of the parties to be bound is] made part of the contract.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Jones, Eagen, O'Brien, Roberts, Pomeroy, Nix, Manderino

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

53 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.