Legal Opinion
The Matter of the Estate of Edmund Felix Hennel , , Also Known as Edmund Hennel
New York Court of Appeals
Decided June 29, 2017No. 78PublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Fahey, J.
Petitioners seek to enforce an oral promise that would otherwise be void under the statute of frauds. They rely on the theories of promissory estoppel and unconscionability. We agree, as a general matter, that where the elements of promissory estoppel are satisfied and enforcement of the statute of frauds would inflict such an unjust and egregious result upon the party who detrimentally relied on the oral promise that the resulting injury would be unconscionable, the opposing party may be estopped from relying on the statute of frauds. Nevertheless, we conclude…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Christian v. ChristianNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
- Gillman v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N. A.New York Court of Appeals · 1988
- Anostario v. VicinanzoNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- Wood v. . RabeNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
- Messner Vetere Berger McNamee Schmetterer Euro RSCG Inc. v. Aegis Group PlcNew York Court of Appeals · 1999
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Villnave Constr. Servs., Inc. v. Crossgates Mall Gen. Co. Newco, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022
- Bent v. St. John's Univ., N.Y.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
- Matter of SteinbergAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
- Behler v. Kai-Shing TaoNew York Court of Appeals · 2025
- Behler v. Kai-Shing TaoNew York Court of Appeals · 2025
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.