'Houghtailing v. Randen, 25 Barb., 21; Sage v. Hazard, Lawrence v. Fox, 20 N. Y., 268; Judson v. Gray, 17 Forbearance of a claim which the claimant knows to be Decker v. Judson, 16 N. Y., 449; Smith v. Algar, 1 'Decker v. Judson, 16 N. Y., 449. Livingston v. Rogers, 1 Cai., 583; Utica & Syracuse S781. An existing legal obligation resting upon the promiser, or a moral obligation,2 originating in some benefit conferred upon the promiser, or prejudice suffered by the promisee, is also a good consideration for a promise, to an extent corresponding with the extent of the obligation, but no further or otherwise.3 Spencer v. Ballou, 18 N. Y., 330. The common law does not recognize moral obligations, Consideration lawful. Effect of its illegality. Consideration exe cuted or executory. ever, entirely fail to establish any satisfactory princi- Phetteplace v. Steere, 2 Johns., 442; Roscorla v. Thomas, 3 Q. B., 234; Hopkins v. Logan, 5 M. & W., S782. The consideration of a contract must be lawful, within the meaning of section 827. $ 783. If any part of a single consideration for one or more objects, or of several considerations for a single object, is unlawful, the entire contract is void. This principle is deducible from all the cases taken together, though not to be found thus stated in any one case. Thus there is no doubt that, if the consideration is single, or in other words indivisible, its partial illegality is fatal to the contract (Mills v. Mills, 36 Barb., 474; Rose v. Truax, 21 id., 361; Pepper v. Haight, 20 id, 429; Barton v. Port Jackson Plankroad Co., 17 id., 397; Burt v. Place, 8 Cow., 431; see Brown v. Brown, 34 Barb., 533; Porter v. Havens, 37 id., 343). The limitations of the rule are conformable to the principle of sections 778 and 779. S784. A consideration may be executed or executory, in whole or in part. In so far as it is executory, it is subject to the provisions of chapter IV of this Title. 1 considera S785. When a consideration is executory, it is not Executory indispensable that the contract should specify its tion. amount or the means of ascertaining it.' It may be left to the decision of a third person, or regulated by any specified standard." But There is perhaps no precedent for a general provision tained. $786. When a contract does not determine the How ascer amount of the consideration, nor the method by which it is to be ascertained,' or when it leaves the amount thereof to the discretion of an interested party, the consideration must be so much money as the object of the contract is reasonably worth. 1 Hoadly v. McLaine, 10 Bing., 487. 2 Brown v. Bellows, 4 Pick., 189. Effect of bility of impossi $787. Where a contract provides an exclusive method by which its consideration is to be ascertained, which method is on its face impossible or in catio unlawful, the entire contract is void. Pothier on Sale, No. 24. ascertaincon sideration. $788. Where a contract provides an exclusive 1a. method by which its consideration is to be ascertained, which method appears possible on its face, but in fact is, or becomes, impossible or unlawful, such provision only is void. Pothier (Sale, No. 24) holds that the contract in such case Cont., 5th ed., 525), but it seems more probable that the common law would regard the contract as made for a reasonable consideration, to be ascertained in any usual way. Thus, where a covenant to renew a lease provides for an arbitration to determine the rent, and no award is ever made, the court will enforce the renewal at a reasonable rent (Reformed Dutch Church v. Parkhurst, 4 Bosw., 491; Dunnell v. Keteltas, 16 Abb. Pr., 205) Contracts express or implied. Express contract, what. Implied contract, what. What con tracts may oral Contract not in writ TITLE II. MANNER OF CREATING CONTRACTS. SLOTION 789. Contracts express or implied. 790. Express contract, what. 791. Implied contract, what. 792. What contracts may be oral. 793. Contract not in writing through fraud, may be enforced against fraudulent party. 794. What contracts must be written. 795. Effect of writing. 796. Contract in writing, takes effect when. 797. Provisions of chapter on transfers of real property. 798. Seal, what. 799. Effect of seal. $789. A contract is either express or implied. S790. An express contract is one, the terms of which are stated in words. S791. An implied contract is one, the existence and terms of which are manifested by conduct. The ordinary definition of an implied contract includes obligations imposed by law upon parties, as between each other. These obligations are, however, considered in another part of this Code. $792. All contracts may be oral, except such as are specially required by statute to be in writing. See Bank of Rochester v. Jones, 4 N. Y., 497; Flory v. $793. Where a contract, which is required by law ing through to be in writing, is prevented from being put into fraud, may be enforced writing by the fraud of a party thereto, any other fraudulent party who is by such fraud led to believe that it is in against writing, and acts upon such belief to his prejudice, party. may enforce it against the fraudulent party. Story Eq. Jur., § 768. This principle of equity ought to be recognized in all cases, whether legal or equitable. 2 contracts written. S794. The following contracts, or some memoran- What dum thereof, expressing the parties, their consent must be and the object of the contract, must be in writing, subscribed by the party to be charged thereby, or by his agent for the purpose: 1. An agreement that, by its terms, cannot be fully performed within one year ; 2. An agreement made upon consideration of marriage, other than mutual promises to marry." . The consideration is no longer necessary to be stated The names of all the parties must be stated in the The whole object of the contract, and all its terms, must construed as applying only to contracts which cannot Day v. N. Y. Central R. R., 31 Barb., 548, 556; Am- |