Dave Tompkins was up late one night watching a television campaign for a charitable organization. The organization was seeking donations in order to construct a new building that would serve as the organization's headquarters. One of Tomkins' favorite

Question

performers appeared to promote the campaign, and this prompted Dave to telephone in a pledge. Tomkins pledged $10,000 to the charity and, feeling good about his action, finally went to sleep. The next morning, Tomkins regretted making the pledge because its enforcement would cause great personal financial hardship. Will the charity be able to legally enforce the pledge Tomkins made? If so, why might the charity choose not to enforce a lawful pledge?

Answer 1

Tomkins probably is bound by his pledge to the charitable organization. Charitable subscriptions by which individuals make pledges to finance the construction of a college building, a church, or another structure for charitable purposes are binding to the extent that the donor should have reasonably realized that the charity was relying on the promise in undertaking the building program. Some states do require proof that the charity has relied on the subscription.
For the purpose of maintaining favorable public relations, a charitable group might choose not enforce its rights to claim payment of a pledge in this situation. What individual would look kindly on a charity that would take voluntary donors to court to force payment??