CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. No consideration need appear in written contract guaranteeing another’s payment. Stern v. Deutsch, 9 K.A. 218, 220, 59 P. 687.

2. Under written contracts importing consideration lack of consideration affirmative defense. Pratt v. Cook, 10 K.A. 144, 146, 62 P. 438.

3. Endorsement of contract in writing imports a consideration; extension of time sufficient consideration in note. Fuller v. Scott, 8 K. 25, 34.

4. A contract in writing imports a consideration. Waynick v. Richmond, 11 K. 488; Sprague v. Mo. Pac. Rly. Co., 34 K. 347, 353, 8 P. 465; Avery v. Lambertson, 74 K. 304, 307, 86 P. 456.

5. Promissory note; a contract in writing imports consideration. Swartz v. Redfield, 13 K. 550, 557.

6. Bond requiring obligor to convey real estate imports consideration. Northern Kas. Town Co. v. Oswald, 18 K. 336, 339.

7. A check is a written contract and imports consideration. Hawkins v. Windhorst, 82 K. 522, 524, 108 P. 805.

8. Memorandum on note, not signed, does not import consideration. Bank v. Dryden, 91 K. 216, 217, 137 P. 928.

9. A promissory note imports a valuable consideration. Hoover v. Hoover’s Estate, 104 K. 635, 638, 639, 180 P. 275.

10. A bill of sale imports a valuable consideration. Warner v. Carter, 109 K. 285, 289, 198 P. 960.

11. Written acceptance of bill of exchange imports valuable consideration. Ingersoll v. Bank, 109 K. 534, 537, 202 P. 837. Overruled: Ingersoll v. Bank, 110 K. 122, 202 P. 837.

12. Evidence insufficient to overcome presumption of consideration of deed. Gerard v. Costin, 113 K. 617, 215 P. 1011; Drake v. Seck, 116 K. 717, 229 P. 67; Comfort v. Lynch, 118 K. 40, 42, 233 P. 1042.

13. Notes subject to defenses still import consideration; burden of proof on defendant when execution admitted. Fidelity State and Savings Bank v. Franz, 128 K. 500, 278 P. 718.

14. Not applicable where no mutual obligation and only nominal consideration stated. Shelden v. Bright, 135 K. 361, 366, 10 P.2d 831.

15. Contract held to import a consideration hereunder. Boner v. Texas Co., 143 K. 746, 750, 57 P.2d 420.

16. Written subscription pledge to college held to import a consideration; want of consideration is affirmative defense which must be established. Southwestern College v. Hawley, 144 K. 652, 654, 62 P.2d 850.

17. Signer has burden of proving lack of consideration; affirmative defense. Furst v. De Witt, 145 K. 300, 305, 65 P.2d 567.

18. A deed imports a consideration; burden of proof. Chisholm v. Snider, 145 K. 573, 579, 66 P.2d 573.

19. Applied to deed; want of consideration is affirmative defense. Carver v. Main, 146 K. 251, 256, 69 P.2d 681.

20. Promissory note and mortgage in writing import a consideration. Niebauer v. Bivins, 149 K. 260, 268, 87 P.2d 619.

21. Oil and gas lease within purview of section. Riffel v. Dieter, 159 K. 628, 636, 157 P.2d 831.

22. Writing imports consideration; antenuptial agreement upheld. In re Estate of Greenleaf, 169 K. 22, 28, 217 P.2d 275.

23. Applied; deed executed following purchase contract; presumption consideration was imported. Palmer v. The Land & Power Co., 172 K. 231, 237, 239 P.2d 960.

24. Executed deed imports consideration; challenging party has burden of proving otherwise. Hansen v. Walker, 175 K. 121, 123, 259 P.2d 242.

25. Applied; mineral deed held not void for lack of consideration. Rostocil v. United Oil & Gas Royalty Ass’n, 177 K. 15, 24, 274 P.2d 761.

26. Written antenuptial agreement signed by parties imports consideration. In re Estate of Ward, 178 K. 366, 372, 285 P.2d 1081.

27. Contract merged in deed; waiver of mineral reservation right presumes consideration. Palmer v. The Land & Power Co., 180 K. 492, 495, 306 P.2d 152.

28. Written acknowledgment of debt without promise to pay actionable. Wilson v. Evans, 185 K. 520, 522, 345 P.2d 1002.

29. Marriage consideration for antenuptial contract; contract valid, construction. Bunger v. Bunger, 187 K. 642, 644, 359 P.2d 1113.

30. Presumption of consideration is presumption of fact; where consideration controverted, question is one for jury. Ferraro v. Fink, 191 K. 53, 56, 379 P.2d 266.

31. Cited; parol evidence admissible to show want or failure of consideration stated in written contract. First Construction Co., Inc. v. Gallup, 204 K. 73, 76, 460 P.2d 594.

32. Assignment contract consideration term need not be in writing if other writings exist which satisfy statute of frauds. Carson v. Chevron Chemical Co., 6 K.A.2d 776, 791, 635 P.2d 1248 (1981).

33. Contract need not state on its face the consideration given; lack of consideration is affirmative defense. State ex rel. Ludwick v. Bryant, 237 K. 47, 50, 51, 697 P.2d 858 (1985).

34. Whether existence of written promissory notes shifts evidentiary burden in summary judgment motion examined. Herr v. McCormick Grain-The Heiman Company, Inc., 841 F.Supp. 1500, 1508 (1993).

35. Whether defendants had right to revoke contract based on lack of consideration examined. First Nat. Bankshares of Beloit, Inc. v. Geisel, 853 F.Supp. 1344, 1352 (1994).

36. Issue regarding whether merchandiser’s continued employment constituted adequate consideration for promissory notes precluded summary judgment. Herr v. Heiman, 75 F.3d 1509, 1515 (1996).

37. Under statute contract consideration is presumed, defendant must raise lack of consideration as an affirmative defense. Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. P & H Cattle Co., Inc., 451 F.Supp.2d 1262, 1274 (2006).