## Facts

- Four days before Blanche Schweizer’s scheduled wedding, her parents (Joseph and Ernestine Schweizer) and her fiancé (Count Oberto Gulinelli) signed a written agreement providing that Joseph would pay Blanche $2,500 annually during his life, beginning on the wedding date, and that Ernestine would continue payments after Joseph’s death.
- The agreement recited Blanche’s engagement and impending marriage as the occasion for the promise and included related assurances about not altering certain testamentary provisions for Blanche and her issue.
- Blanche and the Count married on January 20, 1902; Joseph made the first annual payment that day and continued paying each year through 1911.
- Joseph stopped paying in 1912.
- Blanche and the Count assigned their right to the annual payment to Attilio De Cicco.
- De Cicco sued to recover the 1912 installment; Joseph argued the promise lacked consideration because the couple was already engaged when the agreement was signed.

## Issues

1. Whether the parents’ promise to pay an annuity was supported by consideration where the marriage followed a preexisting engagement between the bride and groom.
2. Whether Blanche, though not a formal signatory, could adopt the promise made in the agreement and enforce it (through her assignee).

## Decision

- The New York Court of Appeals affirmed judgment for De Cicco for the 1912 installment (with interest and costs as awarded below).
- The court held the promise was supported by consideration because the promise was intended to influence the couple’s conduct and they proceeded with the marriage in reliance on it, surrendering their liberty to terminate the engagement.
- The court held Blanche was an intended beneficiary who, upon learning of the promise and marrying in reliance, could adopt the contract, become entitled to enforce it, and validly assign the right to payment.

## Legal Principles

- A promise made by a third party may be supported by consideration even when it relates to performance of an existing engagement, if the promise induces reliance and a legal detriment (including forbearance from terminating the engagement).
- Continued performance in reliance on a promise can supply consideration where the promisee had a legal liberty to refrain from performance and relinquished that liberty.
- An intended third-party beneficiary may adopt and enforce a contract made for the beneficiary’s benefit upon assent shown by reliance and performance.
- Contract rights arising from an enforceable promise for periodic payments may be assigned to an assignee who may sue to recover due installments.

## Conclusion

The court enforced a parent’s written promise to pay an annuity in connection with an impending marriage, finding consideration in the couple’s reliance and decision to proceed with the marriage, and holding that the daughter, as intended beneficiary, could adopt the agreement and assign her right to recover the annual payments.


De Cicco v. Schweizer, 221 N.Y. 431 (N.Y. 1917)