Kenneth McMillan obtained a judgment against Laurence Hibbard for $52,972.74. When Hibbard did not pay, McMillan offered him an option. He could pay the judgment outright, or he could maintain an insurance policy on McMillan’s life and the policy’s proceeds would pay the debt. Hibbard agreed. More than a year later, however, Hibbard had not paid the debt or maintained the policy.
McMillan filed another lawsuit against him. Hibbard argued that the terms of the option agreement were not sufficiently definite or fair. Is he correct? Discuss. [Hibbard v. McMillan, 284 Ga.App. 753, 645 S.E.2d 356 (2007)]
