Final answer:
Marketing Solutions Inc. may be liable for promissory estoppel because Niki relied on their employment promise to her detriment by quitting her previous job. If she can prove a clear promise, reasonable reliance, and substantial harm, she might be able to sue for damages.
Step-by-step explanation:
Marketing Solutions Inc. may be liable for promissory estoppel since they made a promise to Niki, which caused her to rely on this promise and make a serious life change (quitting her job) based on the expectation that the promise would be fulfilled. Promissory estoppel is a legal principle that can enforce a non-contractual promise, under certain conditions, to avoid injustice due to the promisee's reasonable reliance on the promise. If Niki can prove that all the elements of promissory estoppel are present—namely, a clear and definite promise, reasonable reliance on the promise to her detriment, and substantial harm resulting from the reliance—she may have a legal remedy in civil court.
In the absence of a formal contractual obligation, courts may enforce the promise if the non-breaching party took action with the understanding that the promise would be upheld. Therefore, Niki may potentially sue for damages that resulted from her quitting her former job and relying on Marketing Solutions Inc.’s employment promise. The outcome will depend on the specific facts of the case and the jurisdiction’s legal standards pertaining to promissory estoppel.