Question

Under promissory estoppel, a plaintiff must show three things. Which statement is NOT one?

1) The defendant made a clear and definite promise
2) The plaintiff relied on the promise to their detriment
3) The defendant did not intend for the plaintiff to rely on the promise
4) The promise was made in writing

Answer 1

Under promissory estoppel, a plaintiff does not need to show that a promise was made in writing. Instead, the essential elements include a clear and definite promise by the defendant, detrimental reliance on the promise by the plaintiff, and that the reliance was reasonable and foreseeable.

Step-by-step explanation:

The subject of the question revolves around promissory estoppel, a legal principle in contract law. In response to the student's question regarding which statement is NOT one of the things a plaintiff must show under promissory estoppel, the correct answer is:

4) The promise was made in writing.

Under the doctrine of promissory estoppel, the plaintiff must prove the following elements, except for the promise being in writing:

1. The defendant made a clear and definite promise.
2. The plaintiff relied on the promise to their detriment.
3. The reliance on the promise was reasonable and foreseeable by the defendant.

It is not a requirement under promissory estoppel that the promise be in writing. Instead, the focus is on the promise itself, the reliance on the promise, and the resulting detriment to the plaintiff.