Facts
- Wells Fargo Armored Service Corporation of Florida publicly offered “up to $25,000” for information leading to the arrest and conviction of participants in the shooting of its agent and related robbery, and for recovery of the stolen valuables.
- The notice directed that information be sent to Wells Fargo and stated that Wells Fargo’s board of directors would decide who, if anyone, would be paid.
- George Slattery, a licensed polygraph operator engaged by law-enforcement authorities, conducted a polygraph examination of a suspect on an unrelated matter.
- During two days of questioning in that polygraph setting, the suspect confessed to shooting the Wells Fargo guard; the confession led to conviction and sentencing for the Wells Fargo crimes.
- The parties stipulated that the stolen property had not been recovered.
- Slattery did not know of the reward offer when he conducted the interrogation; he learned of it only after the confession was obtained.
Issues
- Whether a claimant can accept and enforce a unilateral reward offer when the claimant performed the requested act without knowledge of the offer.
- Whether performance undertaken as part of a preexisting professional or legal duty to assist law enforcement can supply consideration to support a reward contract.
- Whether the reward notice required completion of all stated conditions, including recovery of stolen valuables, before any reward could be claimed.
Decision
- The appellate court affirmed summary judgment for Wells Fargo.
- The court held no enforceable reward contract arose because Slattery lacked knowledge of the reward offer at the time of performance and therefore did not accept the unilateral offer by performance.
- The court also held Slattery’s acts were performed pursuant to a preexisting duty in his role assisting law enforcement and thus did not constitute consideration for the reward.
- The court affirmed on these grounds rather than the trial court’s rationale focusing on nonrecovery of the stolen property.
Legal Principles
- A public reward notice generally constitutes a unilateral offer that is accepted only by performing the requested act with knowledge of the offer and in response to it.
- Performance rendered without knowledge of the offer is not an acceptance of the unilateral offer and creates no contractual right to the reward.
- Under the preexisting duty rule, an act that a claimant is already obligated to perform (by law, contract, or employment-related duty) is not consideration for a new promise, including a reward.
- Courts may deny reward recovery where the claimant’s asserted “performance” is merely fulfillment of duties owed to law-enforcement authorities, rather than bargained-for action induced by the reward.
Conclusion
The court upheld judgment for Wells Fargo because Slattery neither accepted the reward offer through knowing, responsive performance nor provided consideration beyond his preexisting obligations while working with law enforcement, so no reward contract was formed.