Kiley v. First National Bank

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that to extent bank’s letter constituted a contract, it was terminable at will because it had no defined duration
• recognizing that a signature card constitutes a contract between a bank and its customer and finding that the bank customer accepted bank rules and regulations when the signature card specifically referred to those rules and regulations
• recognizing that a signature card constitutes a contract between a bank and its customer and finding that the bank customer accepted bank rules and regulations when the signature card specifically referred to those rules and regulations
• holding that plaintiffs’ claim that they could have taken their business elsewhere was not enough to establish detriment from reliance; in order to prevail, plaintiffs needed to show that they lost an opportunity to secure what they were seeking perpetually from another institution
• upholding summary judgment where “[a]ny claimed reliance that the [plaintiffs] may have had on the alleged promise to maintain forever the original terms of the account would have been unreasonable.”
• under Maryland law “an enforceable contract must express with definiteness and certainty the nature and extent of the parties’ obligations”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named Kiley v. First National Bank

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• Kiley v. First National Bank
  Supreme Court of Colorado· 1969-10-06
• Kiley v. First National Bank
  Supreme Court of Colorado· 1969-10-06
• Kiley v. First National Bank
  Supreme Court· 1995-10-02