18 Cited authorities

McBride v. Boughton
123 Cal.App.4th 379 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004) Cited 493 times
Holding that common count will "stand or fall" with cause of action seeking the same recovery
Weddington Productions, Inc. v. Flick
60 Cal.App.4th 793 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998) Cited 505 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that an agreement "must not only contain all the material terms but also express each in a reasonably definite manner."
US Ecology, Inc. v. State
129 Cal.App.4th 887 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005) Cited 304 times
Holding that causation is an element of a promissory estoppel claim
Bustamante v. Intuit Inc.
141 Cal.App.4th 199 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006) Cited 290 times
Finding that the conditions for performance as to a purported contractual duty to "take all steps necessary to obtain adequate funding and to formally launch the company" were "fatally uncertain."
Melchior v. New Line Productions, Inc.
106 Cal.App.4th 779 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003) Cited 317 times
Holding that there is no cause of action in California for unjust enrichment
Farmers Ins. Exchange v. Zerin
53 Cal.App.4th 445 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997) Cited 314 times
Holding that insured's obligation to hold third party recoveries "in trust" for the insurer was no more than a "bare promise to reimburse" the insurer, and that " promise to hold property in trust for another, standing alone, will not create an equitable interest in that property"
Alexander v. Codemasters Group Limited
104 Cal.App.4th 129 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002) Cited 247 times 1 Legal Analyses
Adopting the views expressed in Sambrano and Laird
Stockton Mortgage, Inc. v. Tope
233 Cal.App.4th 437 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014) Cited 77 times
Holding that speculation about the creation of a separate agreement is not evidence of a contract
Raedeke v. Gibraltar Sav. & Loan Assn.
10 Cal.3d 665 (Cal. 1974) Cited 231 times
Holding that a gratuitous oral promise to postpone a sale of property pursuant to the terms of a trust deed unenforceable in the absence of consideration
Laks v. Coast Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n
60 Cal.App.3d 885 (Cal. Ct. App. 1976) Cited 189 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that in an action for promissory estoppel, experienced businessmen could not reasonably rely on an ambiguous commitment to loan money

Order Submitted Matter

18 Cited authorities

Holding that common count will "stand or fall" with cause of action seeking the same recovery

Holding that an agreement "must not only contain all the material terms but also express each in a reasonably definite manner."

Holding that causation is an element of a promissory estoppel claim

Finding that the conditions for performance as to a purported contractual duty to "take all steps necessary to obtain adequate funding and to formally launch the company" were "fatally uncertain."

Holding that there is no cause of action in California for unjust enrichment

Holding that insured's obligation to hold third party recoveries "in trust" for the insurer was no more than a "bare promise to reimburse" the insurer, and that " promise to hold property in trust for another, standing alone, will not create an equitable interest in that property"

Adopting the views expressed in Sambrano and Laird

Holding that speculation about the creation of a separate agreement is not evidence of a contract

Holding that a gratuitous oral promise to postpone a sale of property pursuant to the terms of a trust deed unenforceable in the absence of consideration

Holding that in an action for promissory estoppel, experienced businessmen could not reasonably rely on an ambiguous commitment to loan money