Mongold v. Woods

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “for a court to award a quantum meruit recovery, the court must conclude that there is no enforceable express contract between the parties covering the same subject matter”
• stating that “[wjhere it is available, the cause of action based on promissory es-toppel consists of four elements, recently defined as: ‘(1) a promise, (2) which the promi-sor should reasonably expect to cause action by the promisee, (3
• stating that “[wjhere it is available, the cause of action based on promissory es-toppel consists of four elements, recently defined as: ‘(1) a promise, (2) which the promi-sor should reasonably expect to cause action by the promisee, (3) which does cause such action, and (4
• \We will defer to the circuit court's determination of the facts unless unsupported by evidence or plainly wrong because an appellate court lacks the fact-finder's ability to hear and see the witnesses and assess their credibility.\
• “[P]romissory estoppel is not a cognizable cause of action in Virginia.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).