Skip to main content

Invalidating a Contract under the Doctrine of Economic Duress

The doctrine of economic duress has significantly developed and expanded, in recognition of the ever-increasing complexity of the business world. Claims of economic duress in business litigation are becoming more frequent. Several courts, including the United States Supreme Court, have acknowledged that there are situations under which financial pressure may cancel an otherwise enforceable contract. See 13 S. Williston, Contracts, § 1603 at 664 (3d ed. 1970); United States v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 315 U.S. 289, 62 S.Ct. 581, 86 L.Ed. 855 (1942); Hartsville Oil Mill v. United States, 271 U.S. 43, 46 S.Ct. 389, 70 L.Ed. 822 (1926).The definition of economic duress is set forth in Williston:1. The party alleging economic duress must show that he has been the victim of a wrongful or unlawful act or threat, and2. Such act or threat must be one which deprives the victim of his unfettered will. [13 Williston, supra, § 1617 at 704 (footnotes omitted)]

The courts in New Jersey have defined economic duress as in the Williston formulation. In Woodside Homes, Inc. v. Morristown, 26 N.J. 529, 544 (1958), define that economic duress requires "an assent by one party to an improper or wrongful demand by another under circumstances in which the former has little choice but to accede to the demand.  Economic duress occurs when the party alleging it is the victim of a wrongful or unlawful act or threat which deprives the victim of his unfettered will. Quigley v. KPMG Peat Marwick, LLP, 330 N.J.Super. 252, 263 (App. Div. 2000) (citing 13 Williston on Contracts § 1617), certif. denied, 165 N.J. 527 (2000).


It is important to distinguish that "Merely taking advantage of another's financial difficulty is not duress. Rather, the person alleging financial difficulty must allege that it was contributed to or caused by the one accused of coercion." Continental Bank v. Barclay Riding Academy, Inc., 93 N.J. 153, 176, 459 A.2d 1163, cert. denied, 464 U.S. 994, 104 S.Ct. 488, 78 L.Ed.2d 684 (1983).  Therefore, when there is adequacy of consideration, there is generally no duress.... Whenever a party to a contract seeks the best possible terms, there can be no rescission merely upon the grounds of driving a hard bargain. Merely taking advantage of another's financial difficulty is not duress. Rather, the person alleging financial difficulty must allege that it was contributed to or caused by the one accused of coercion.... Under this rule, the party exerting pressure is scored only for that for which he alone is responsible. [Williston, supra, § 1617 at 708 (footnotes omitted)]


Disclaimer: The contents of this website are of general nature and not intended to be a substitute for legal advice or the formation of a lawyer-client relationship. In order to be properly represented, please contact your local professional. In addition, the information given on this web site has been composed by a New Jersey attorney practicing exclusively in New Jersey. None of the information contained herein should be deemed to apply in other states, nor should this website be construed as an attempt by the author to practice law in any state other than New Jersey.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Establishing Consumer Fraud Claims in New Jersey

The New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act purpose was to combat sharp practices and dealings that victimized consumers by luring them into purchases through fraudulent or deceptive means. It was expanded to allow a private right of action for consumers that are victims of violations of the CFA. The private right of action included provisions that allowed for entitlement to treble damages, reasonable attorney’s fees, and reasonable costs of suit. In a cause of action asserting a violation of the NJ Consumer Fraud Act a plaintiff must prove:     1) unlawful conduct by defendant;     2) an ascertainable loss by plaintiff;     3) a causal relationship between the unlawful conduct and the ascertainable loss.       D’Agostino v. Maldonado , 216 N.J. 168, 183-184 (2013) (quoting Bosland v. Warnock Dodge  Inc ., 197 N.J. 543, 557 (2009)). If the plaintiff is successful in establishing his/her cause of action, the plaintiff is entitled to treb...
Post a Comment
Read more

Harassment and Domestic Violence in New Jersey

Harassment can constitute a basis for the issuance of a restraining order if the statutory elements are satisfied. See N.J.S.A. 2C:33-4. The statute defines harassment: Except as provided in subsection e., a person commits a petty disorderly persons offense if, with purpose to harass another, he: a. Makes, or causes to be made, a communication or communications anonymously or at extremely inconvenient hours, or in offensively coarse language, or any other manner likely to cause annoyance or alarm; b. Subjects another to striking, kicking, shoving, or other offensive touching, or threatens to do so; or c. Engages in any other course of alarming conduct or of repeatedly committed acts with purpose to alarm or seriously annoy such other person. [N.J.S.A. 2c:33-4 (emphasis added).] As provided by the statute, a finding of harassment requires proof of an intent or purpose to harass. State v. Hoffman , 149 N.J . 564, 576-77 (1997). An assertion by a plaintiff that he or she felt ha...
Post a Comment
Read more

When do I need to Probate A Will in New Jersey?

PROBATE AND WILLS IN NEW JERSEY As Estate Planning Attorneys in New Jersey we often get asks whether probate is necessary if the decedent has a Will.  To better answer this question we need to know what is probate.  Probate is the process which permits an executor to transfer assets as directed by a decedent in their Last Will & Testament to the beneficiaries in accordance to the decedent's Will.  In order to make a determination of which decedent's assets must go through probate, we need to determine the tittle in which the asset is held. Assets held in the name of the decedent alone such as real estate, personal property and monies owed to the testator will generate be transferred through probate.  There is however a caveat in this situation as to some financial firms provide beneficiary designation forms which may transfer these accounts without probate. Assets held by the testator and another person jointly, with a right of survivorship, are said to be ...
Post a Comment
Read more