Hoover v. Moran

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “under the doctrine of promissory estoppel, [Plaintiff] should have his day in court notwithstanding the possible application of the statute of frauds writing requirement . . .”
• holding that “under the doctrine of promissory estoppel, [Plaintiff] should have his day in court notwithstanding the possible application of the statute of frauds writing requirement . . .”
• Although the circuit court did not address a statute of frauds argument, the respondent raised and briefed the issue before the circuit court; accordingly, this Court could overrule on other grounds, based upon the record before it.
• “[0]ur cases have made clear that ‘it is permissible for us to affirm the granting of [dismissal] on bases different or grounds other than those relied upon by the circuit court.’ ” (quoting Gentry v. Mangum, 195 W.Va. 512, 519, 466 S.E.2d 171, 178 (1995))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).