Marrero v. McDonnell Douglas Capital Corp.

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 “future promises” cited by the plaintiff “were contractual and cannot be the basis of an action for fraud”
• analyzing fraudulent inducement after the plaintiff “sought to avoid the ‘present fact’ rule”
• following Cunningham and concluding that \resignation from one position to assume another and relocation of family would be customary and necessary incidents of changing jobs rather than consideration to support a promissory estoppel claim\
• resignation from one's position to assume another and relocation of one's family are customary and necessary incidents of changing jobs rather than consideration to support a claim of promissory estoppel
• resignation from one’s position to assume another and relocation of one’s family are customary and necessary incidents of changing jobs rather than consideration to support a claim of promissory estoppel
• “The sine qua non of promissory estoppel is a promise that is definite and clear.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).