Legal Opinion

US Ecology, Inc. v. State

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 25, 2005No. D042426PublishedCited by 91 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

NARES, J.

On this appeal we are presented with an issue of first impression: whether a plaintiff pursuing a claim for promissory estoppel must prove that the defendant on that claim caused the plaintiff’s damages. We conclude that, as in ordinary contract actions, a plaintiff seeking recovery on a promissory estoppel theory must prove that the defendant’s breach was a substantial factor in causing the plaintiff’s damages. Further, even if we were to conclude that causation is not a necessary element of all promissory estoppel claims, we hold that because promissory estoppel is an…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. New York v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. US Ecology, Inc. v. United States Department of the InteriorCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2000
  3. Bowers v. BernardsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
  4. Mitchell v. GonzalesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  5. In Re Marriage of BurgessCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by91 opinions

  1. Amanda Sateriale v. R J Reynolds Tobacco CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
  2. Shoyoye v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  3. Graham-Sult v. ClainosCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
  4. Douglas E. Barnhart, Inc. v. CMC Fabricators, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2012
  5. Rosal v. First Federal Bank of CaliforniaDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2009

86 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API