California Court of Appeal

In an action against a lender alleging wrongful foreclosure, breach of contract promissory estoppel, and unfair business practices, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed in part where, although the facts presented established detrimental reliance sufficient to support a claim based on promissory estoppel, there was no exchange of true consideration. However, the order is reversed in part where plaintiffs presented sufficient evidence of a definite promise from defendant's employee to support plaintiffs' promissory estoppel claim.

Appellate Information

• Decided 04/09/2010
• Published 04/09/2010

Judges

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel