Vincent Simmons appeals from the trial court’s order awarding to his wife, Dorothy Simmons, a one-half interest in land that he inherited from his parents. Vincent contends that the land is the non-marital property and, consequently, should have remained his separate property. Vincent and Dorothy Simmons were married on October 9, 1976. On April 11, 1995, Vincent’s mother, Louise Simmons, executed The Louise B. Simmons Trust in order to convey certain land in Florida to her children, Vincent, and his sister, upon her death. Louise Simmons died on April 1, 1999, but the land remained in trust for several years after her death. After Louise died, Dorothy became concerned that she would not receive an interest in the Florida land if Vincent died before the trust was distributed, so she hired an attorney in Monticello, David Chambers, to prepare a document to protect her interest. After speaking with Dorothy, Mr. Chambers drafted an affidavit to be executed by Vincent, which stated, in pertinent part: “I have been married to my wife, Dorothy Simmons, for 25 years. It is my intention, through this affidavit, to convey to my said wife marital interest in said real property. If I should die prior to the above-stated Trust being dissolved, then my said wife shall receive my share of said real property as her own property. Otherwise, if said Trust is dissolved prior to my death, then my wife shall be entitled to her legal marital interest in said real property.” The trust property was distributed to Vincent and his sister on November 1, 2002. On February 11, 2003, Dorothy filed a complaint for divorce. The parties reached agreement regarding the division of all property except for the Florida land. On appeal, Vincent argues that the trial court erred in finding that his affidavit constituted a contract to convey an interest in the Florida land to Dorothy. He argues that there is a total absence of consideration to support a contract in this case. Dorothy argues that her ongoing marriage to Vincent constituted adequate consideration to support the contract. Should the appeals court uphold the trial court’s ruling and grant one-half interest in the property to Dorothy? How would you rule? What rule of consideration applies in this case?