Connection lost
Server error
CONGREGATION KADIMAH TORAS-MOSHE v. DeLEO Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A synagogue sued to enforce a decedent’s oral promise to donate $25,000. The court refused enforcement, finding the promise was a gratuitous pledge lacking the essential elements of consideration or detrimental reliance required to form a binding contract.
Legal Significance: This case reaffirms the traditional requirement of consideration or reliance for enforcing charitable pledges, declining to adopt the Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 90(2) rule that would make such promises enforceable without proof of reliance, especially for oral promises against an estate.
CONGREGATION KADIMAH TORAS-MOSHE v. DeLEO Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
The plaintiff, Congregation Kadimah Toras-Moshe, sought to enforce an oral promise for $25,000 made by a decedent. During a prolonged illness, the decedent was visited by the Congregation’s rabbi. On several of these visits, the decedent orally promised to give the Congregation $25,000. In response, the Congregation developed a plan to use the funds to convert a storage room into a library that would be named after the decedent. The Congregation also incorporated the anticipated $25,000 into its budget. The promise was never put in writing. After the decedent died intestate, the administrator of his estate refused to pay the pledged amount. The Congregation filed suit to compel payment, arguing the promise was an enforceable contract supported by either consideration or reliance.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Is an oral promise to make a charitable donation enforceable against the promisor’s estate where the promise is not supported by consideration or detrimental reliance?
No. The court affirmed summary judgment for the estate, holding that the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Is an oral promise to make a charitable donation enforceable against the promisor’s estate where the promise is not supported by consideration or detrimental reliance?
Conclusion
This decision reinforces the traditional contract-law framework for charitable subscriptions in Massachusetts, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis no
Legal Rule
An oral promise to make a charitable donation is an unenforceable gratuitous Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequ
Legal Analysis
The court analyzed the enforceability of the decedent's promise under the two Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, qu
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- An oral promise to make a charitable donation is unenforceable without