Just wanted to know if I am looking at this right:
Assume a scenario where a P/D argue consideration of an argument. If consideration is affirmed, then that means the court argue that there has been a bargain in place.
Does promissory estoppel come into play where there was some kind of undue hardship that was never compensated by the promisor?
The reason why this is tripping me up is that, normally, parties are disputing payment when arguing for consideration. I will give you material for free, but you have to dispose it (this has consideration, benefit to promisor, detriment to promisee).
Assume scenario where the material causes some kind of issue on the job you're working on (as the promisee in original scenario), and you patch it up but want to recover costs- is that where you can then use PE?
(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
2 posts • Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: SubmedianHomeskAlien and 22 guests