Balfour v. Balfour – Case Brief Summary
Summary of Balfour v. Balfour, 2 K.B. 571 (1919).
Mr. Balfour (D) and Mrs. Balfour (P) lived in Ceylon and visited England on a vacation. The plaintiff remained in England for medical treatment and the defendant agreed to send her a specific amount of money each month until she could return. The defendant later asked to remain separated and Mrs. Balfour sued for restitution of her conjugal rights and for alimony equal to the amount her husband had agreed to send. Mrs. Balfour obtained a decree nisi and five months later was granted an order for alimony. The lower court entered judgment in favor of the plaintiff and held that the defendant’s promise to send money was enforceable. The court held that Mrs. Balfour’s consent was sufficient consideration to render the contract enforceable and the defendant appealed. Issues
1. Must both parties intend that an agreement be legally binding in order to be an enforceable contract? 2. Under what circumstances will a court decline to enforce an agreement between spouses? Holding and Rule
1. Yes. Both parties must intend that an agreement be legally binding in order to be an enforceable contract. 2. The court will not enforce agreements between spouses that involve daily life. Agreements between husband and wife over matters that affect their daily lives are not subject to contractual interpretation, even when consideration is present. Spouses normally intend that the terms of their agreements can be varied as situations develop. The court held that it was presumed that the parties made the agreement as husband and wife and did not intend that it could be sued upon. The court held that as a matter of public policy it could not resolve disputes between spouses. Disposition
Judgment for plaintiff Mrs. Balfour reversed.
Contracts related to the social aspect of marriage will not be enforced by the courts. Contracts between spouses related to business relationships can be enforced, however. Courts are willing to support negotiated divorce settlements and written statements of support. See Burnham v. Superior Court of California for a law school civil procedure case brief involving an issue of personal jurisdiction in connection with a divorce lawsuit.
Lucy v. Zehmer
Hamer v. Sidway
Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.
LawnixCase BriefsComplete Cases IndexCivil ProcedureConstitutional LawContractsCriminal LawOutlinesPropertyTorts
Top of Form
Bottom of Form
Over 750 OUTLINES
Stereotypes Focus Defensive Projection
The Ohio State University
B. Keith Payne
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Defensive projection is the process of perceiving one’s undesirable qualities in others. The present research shows how stereotypes guide and justify the projection of specific traits onto specific group members. In four studies, the authors demonstrated that people who experienced a threat to a specific dimension of their self-concept selectively activated this dimension in a stereotype and derogated stereotyped others on this dimension. They further showed that stereotyped individuals are more likely to serve as targets of projection than are nonstereotyped individuals. These results demonstrate the functional role of stereotypes in guiding and constraining motivated self-enhancement.
Keywords: projection; stereotyping; accessibility; self-threat; compen- satory self-enhancement
Can stereotypes reveal more about a perceiver than a
person perceived? According to theories of defensive
projection, stereotypes may do just that (Allport, 1954;
Newman & Caldwell, 2005). Projection is the process of
perceiving one’s undesirable qualities in others as a way
to protect one’s self-image (A. Freud, 1936; S. Freud,
References: Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-
Baumeister, R. F., & Scher, S. J. (1988). Self-defeating behavior pat-
terns among normal individuals: Review and analysis of common
Biernat, M., & Manis, M. (1994). Shifting standards and stereotype-
Bodenhausen, G. V., & Wyer, R. S. (1987). Social cognition and social
reality: Information acquisition and use in the laboratory and the
Bramel, D. (1963). Selection of a target for defensive projection. Jour-
nal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 318-324.
Burish, T. G., & Houston, B. K. (1979). Causal projection, similarity
projection, and coping with threat to self-esteem
Campbell, D., Miller, N., Lubetsky, J., & O’Connell, E. (1964). Variet-
ies of projection in trait attribution
Clement, R. W., & Krueger, J. (2002). Social categorization moderates
Devine, P. G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and
Edlow, D. W., & Kiesler, C. A. (1966). Ease of denial and defensive pro-
Epstein, R., & Baron, R. M. (1969). Cognitive dissonance and pro-
jected hostility toward outgroups
Fein, S., & Spencer, S. J. (1997). Prejudice as self-image maintenance:
Affirming the self through derogating others
Feshbach, S., & Singer, R. D. (1957). The effects of fear arousal and
suppression of fear upon social perception
Freud, A. (1936). The ego and the mechanisms of defense. London:
collected papers of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 1). London: Hogarth. (Origi-
nal work published 1924)
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1986). The aversive form of racism. In
Gaertner, S. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Reducing ingroup bias: The com-
mon ingroup identity model
Gilbert, D. T., & Hixon, G. (1991). The trouble of thinking: Activation
and application of stereotypic beliefs
Govorun, O., Fuegen, K., & Payne, B. K. (2005). [The effect of projec-
tion on self-ratings]
Halpern, J. (1977). Projection: A test of the psychoanalytic hypothe-
Higgins, E. T. (1996). Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicabil-
ity, and salience
Holmes, D. S. (1968). Dimensions of projection. Psychological Bulletin,
Holmes, D. S. (1978). Projection as a defense mechanism. Psychologi-
cal Bulletin, 85, 677-688.
Holmes, D. S., & Houston, B. K. (1971). The defensive function of
Horney, K. (1939). New ways in psychoanalysis. New York: Norton.
(2004). The projection of implicit and explicit goals. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 86, 545-559.
Kunda, Z., Davies, P. G., Adams, B., & Spencer, S. J. (2002). The
dynamic time course of stereotype activation: Activation, dissipa-
Kunda, Z., & Spencer, S. J. (2003). When do stereotypes come to mind
and when do they color judgment? A goal-based theory of stereo-
Lambert, A. J., Cronen, S., Chasteen, A., & Lickel, B. (1996). Private
Mikulincer, M., & Horesh, N. (1999). Adult attachment style and the
perception of others: The role of projective mechanisms
of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 1022-1034.
Murstein, B. I., & Pryer, R. S. (1959). The concept of projection: A
Newman, L. S., & Caldwell, T. L. (2005). Allport’s “living inkblots”:
The role of defensive projection in stereotyping and prejudice
Newman, L. S., Caldwell, T. L., Chamberlin, B., & Griffin, T. (2005).
Newman, L. S., Duff, K. J., & Baumeister, R. F. (1997). A new look at
defensive projection: Thought suppression, accessibility, and
Please join StudyMode to read the full document