Reliance On Oral Promises: Statues Of Frauds And "Promissory Estoppel"
Date
2009
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Texas Tech Law Review
Abstract
This Article shows that the differences can be traced to different uses and misuses of the term promissory estoppel. Notes that the question of whether the term promissory estoppel should be used to describe § 90 liability based on reliance has long been moot: judges and law professors have been referring § 90 as promissory estoppel for more than seventy-five years.
Description
Rights
Rights Availability
Keywords
Promissory estoppel, Restatement of contracts concept of promissory estoppel, Restatement § 90, Performance exception, Oral promises, Estoppel to plead the statute of frauds, Restatement Second § 139, Promise within the Statute of Frauds, McIntosh v. Murphy
Citation
David G. Epstein, Ryan D. Starbird, and Joshua C. Vincent, Reliance On Oral Promises: Statues Of Frauds And "Promissory Estoppel", 42 Tex. Tech L. Rev. 913 (2009-2010)