Alternative Theories to Satisfy K

Question 1

Promissory Estoppel/ detrimental reliance

Answer 1

(1) A Promise
(2) W/ reasonable expectation that the promisee would rely on it and
(3) The Promise did induce justifiable action or forbearance by the promisee
(objective standard on reliance and reasonableness)

(4) Enforcement of promise is necessary to avoid injustice

(5) Remedy may be limited as justice requires

Question 2

Quasi-K/ unjust enrichment

Answer 2

Not traditional K (no mutual assent usually)/ But restitution available if

(1) P conferred a measurable benefit to the d
(2) P conferred the benefit w/ the reasonable expectation of being compensated for its value AND
(3) The D would be unjustly enriched if he were allowed to retain the benefit w/o compensating the P b/c
(a) D knew or had reason to know of P expectation; or (b) P had a reasonable excuse of conferring benefit w/o D knowledge

Question 3

Restitution Recovery vs Breach Recovery

Answer 3

Restitution- Economic value that P conferred to d in the quasi-k

Breach- Recovery of future, reliance and expectation of K

Question 4

Moral Obligation + subsequent promise

Answer 4

Past consideration is NOT consideration
- Some courts may enforce a promise supported by past consideration if there is a Strong moral obligation and justice so requires.
Two approaches
1 Mills v. Wyman
denied no “bargain”
2 Webb v. Mcgown
Accepted bargain already started and it occurred over time

Question 5

For Promissory Estoppel what is justifiable action or forbearance by the promisee

Answer 5

Is whether a reasonable person in the promisee’s position would have been induced by the promise to engage in the particular action or forbearance