Cengage Advantage Books: Business Law 9th Edition by Arnold Goldman ,William Sigismond

Exercise 9

Facts
Houston worked at a local bakery in a small town but sought to obtain a supermarket franchise with a large chain called "Blue Bird." Houston was assured that upon payment of a franchise fee of $120,000, Blue Bird would build him a franchised store at a new location. Houston was advised by Blue Bird to first buy a small grocery store in his hometown in order to get some management experience, which he did. Three months later, Blue Bird told Houston to sell his store and get ready for the move to a franchised store. Houston reluctantly did sell the store, but at a loss, and took a temporary job at a local bakery on the night shift. Blue Bird then told Houston that "everything was ready to go except that more money was needed to start up the franchise." Houston, with much difficulty, raised the money. Blue Bird then told Houston again that even more money was needed. This time Houston, his funds depleted, sued Blue Bird.
At Trial
Houston sued Blue Bird for damages (relying on a promise), lost profits, and expenses based upon breach of contract. Blue Birds attorney claimed the parties never reached a legal agreement on essential factors necessary to establish a binding contract, including the lack of consideration. The attorney claimed that it was no more than a handshake.
Questions
1. Define consideration.
2. What legal theory could be used by Houston in court to counter Blue Birds claim of lack of consideration in a proposed agreement between Blue Bird and Houston?
3. I s this theory a legal or an equity doctrine?