Court of Appeals of
246 N.Y. 369, 159 N.E. 173.
Issue: Was the promise purely gratuitous and thus unenforceable?
Rule: Courts will not enforce purely gratuitous promises with some exceptions such as charitable subscriptions.
Analysis: The court finds that naming
a fund after
Cardozoís dicta suggests that promissory estoppel will in the future be a ground for enforcing promises that is really part of the theory of consideration.
Kellogg dissents and says he didnít find the consideration cited by Cardozo to be valid.
Conclusion: The judgment of the lower courts is reversed and a verdict is entered for the plaintiff.