Free Newsletter
Promissory Estoppel – Clear & Definite Promise
admin//August 13, 2012//
In this business dispute, appellant challenged the District Court’s award of damages based on promissory estoppel, and respondent argued that the court erred in determining that the parties did not enter into a contract. The Court of Appeals agreed with the District Court that the parties did not establish a contract. They also held that the evidence did not establish that appellant made any clear or definite promises with respect to electrical and flooring work, and therefore respondent’s promissory-estoppel claim failed as a matter of law. Reversed.
A11-1682 Barriball v. Langer (Hennepin County)
Top News
- Who is liable when AI goes rogue? Lawyers see new risks
- Trump says he’ll bring ballroom fight to Supreme Court after lower court halts work
- Trump tries new tack against birthright citizenship after Supreme Court snub
- Justices void contractor’s lien, deny legal fees in construction suit
- Judicial Branch announces death of OLPR’S Humiston
Expert Testimony
- Perspectives: Taylor-Travis marriage recalls prenup laws here
- Quandaries & Quagmires: Fast-Tracking Temporary Lawyer Suspensions
- Perspectives: ‘Slam’ suits: Recalling wrestling cases as WWE arrives
- Best At Work Insights: We tore out the workforce backup generator
Legal Tech
- Criminal defense lawyers have duty to use AI, paper argues
- AI is reshaping family law practice, but attorneys worry about DIY research
- Massachusetts court rejects work product protection for AI documents by girlfriend
