Daniels v. Long Is. D.D.S.O.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that if plaintiff could not reasonably rely on any of the defendant’s representations, promissory estoppel does not apply
• denial of a motion for a directed verdict on a promissory estoppel claim based on representations in pre-contractual negotiations reversed
• “[t]his [C]ourt has consistently held that disclaimers in contracts prevent justifiable reliance on other representations purportedly made by the parties.”
• “[t]his [C]ourt has consistently held that disclaimers in contracts prevent justifiable reliance on other representations purportedly made by the parties.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).