Skip to main content
· 8/11/1987

State v. Lillemo

Citations

  • 410 N.W.2d 66
  • 1987 Minn. App. LEXIS 4656

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).

Judges: Foley, Nierengarten, Randall, Waived

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.