Thomas v. Bryant - 25855 ( La. App. 2 Cir 6/22/94), 639 So. 2d 378

Rule:

The Louisiana Civil Code does not define natural obligations, but states that they arise from circumstances in which the law implies a particular moral duty to render a performance. La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 1760. A moral duty is traditionally defined as a duty of conscience; a legal duty, on the other hand, is correlative of a right to demand a performance. Not every moral duty serves as the basis of a natural obligation. In order for a duty to rise to the level of a natural obligation, the following requirements must be present: (1) The moral duty must be felt towards a particular person, not all persons in general; (2) the person involved feels so strongly about the moral duty that he truly feels he owes a debt; (3) the duty can be fulfilled through rendering a performance whose object is of pecuniary value; (4) a recognition of the obligation by the obligor must occur, either by performing the obligation or by promising to perform. This recognition brings the natural obligation into existence and makes it a civil obligation; (5) fulfillment of the moral duty must not impair the public order.

Facts:

Myles and Theresa Bryant, husband and wife, jointly executed a promissory note for $ 5750 payable to Jerald Thomas on February 22, 1989. At that time, David Thomas, the 21-year-old son of Jerald Thomas and Theresa Bryant, was in Charter Forest Hospital because of alcohol and drug abuse problems. The amount of the note represented one-half of the medical bill owed to Charter Forest Hospital. On November 28, 1989, Thomas filed suit against Myles and Theresa Bryant, seeking payment of the note, together with interest and attorney fees. Though married when the note was executed, defendant, Myles Bryant, and David's mother, Theresa Bryant, separated and at the time of trial were divorced. Myles Bryant answered plaintiff's petition asserting lack of consideration, fraud and ill practices, and nonperformance of the conditions of the agreement. A default judgment was rendered against Theresa Bryant on April 2, 1990. Thomas successfully moved for summary judgment against Myles Bryant. 

Issue:

Was Thomas entitled to collect on Myles Bryant’s promissory note?

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

Affirming the trial court's judgment for Thomas, the court held that: (1) Myles did not have a civil obligation to pay the note under La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 1967 because he had no civil obligation to pay for his stepson's treatment under La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 1966; (2) Myles voluntarily executed the note because he felt that he had a moral obligation to help his stepson; (3) Myles’ moral obligation met the requirements of a natural obligation under La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 1760 and was enforceable; (4) Myles’ natural obligation served as consideration under La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 1761; (5) Thomas’ financial arrangements to pay the entire bill for his son's treatment did not constitute fraud and were irrelevant because Myles’ obligation to pay the note was unconditional; and (6) Thomas’ right to payment was not subject to any conditions.