Tuomala v. Regent University

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 doctrine [of promissory estoppel] would not apply here because the parties made an enforceable contract”
• applying language from faculty handbook to resolve ambiguity to faculty employment contract that mentioned said handbook
• “When the lan- guage of a contract is ambiguous, parol evidence is admissible, not to contradict or vary contract terms, but to establish the real contract between the parties . . . [and] to de- termine the intention of the parties.”
• promissory estoppel inapplicable where parties have entered into enforceable contract

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).