Trollope v. Koerner

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that promissory estoppel rests upon a promise to do something in the future
• characterizing defendant's Rule 12(b)(6) motion as a motion for a directed verdict
• where an express contract is pleaded, it is unnecessary to plead a claim for recovery in quantum meruit
• it is a fundamental notion that “one cannot claim full performance of a contract, such as a lease, which would be, if performed, concededly [be] executory on both sides”
• “We think a 28 finding of justifiable reliance under the facts of this case would frustrate the basic policy 1 and effect of the subsection of the Statute of Frauds [Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 44-101(6)] involved 2 here.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).