First National Bank of Cicero v. Sylvester

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the trial court improperly granted a summary judgment in favor of the counterdefendant on the counterplaintiffs claim for damages based on promissory estoppel because there were genuine issues of material fact
• holding that the trial court improperly granted a summary judgment in favor of the counterdefendant on the counterplaintiff's claim for damages based on promissory estoppel because there were genuine issues of material fact
• holding, in the context of a claim for promissory estoppel, that a “promise may be inferred from conduct or words”
• noting that for purposes of promissory estoppel, “[a]n express promise is not required,” and a promise may instead be “inferred from conduct and words.”
• “[G]uarantors who suffer ‘direct injury’ have standing to ‘pursue their 19 Case 1:19-cv-00036-WCG Filed 06/05/19 Page 19 of 20 Document 28 own remedies.’” (citation omitted)
• “[G]uarantors who suffer ‘direct injury’ have standing to ‘pursue their 19 Case 1:19-cv-00036-WCG Filed 06/05/19 Page 19 of 20 Document 28 own remedies.’” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).