Legal Opinion
Forrer v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided October 31, 1967PublishedCited by 57 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHeffernan, J.
In Hoffman v. Red Owl Stores, Inc. (1965), 26 Wis. 2d 683, 696, 133 N. W. 2d 267, this court adopted the doctrine embodied in sec. 90 of Restatement, 1 Contracts, p. 110, which states:
“A promise which the promisor should reasonably expect to induce action or forbearance of a definite and substantial character on the part of the promisee and which does induce such action or forbearance is binding if injustice can be avoided only by enforcement of the promise.”
We stated in Hoffman that we chose to use the phrase, “promissory estoppel” to describe this doctrine. It is promissory estoppel upon…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hoffman v. Red Owl Stores, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
- Kovachik v. American Automobile Asso.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
- Saylor v. Marshall & Ilsley BankWisconsin Supreme Court · 1937
- Brown v. Oneida Knitting Mills, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1938
- Milwaukee Corrugating Co. v. KruegerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1924
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by57 opinions
- Henry P. Halsell v. Kimberly-Clark CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1982
- Henkel v. Educational Research Council of AmericaOhio Supreme Court · 1976
- John A. Thelen v. Marc's Big Boy Corp., Marcus Corp., and Stephen H. MarcusCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1995
- Milwaukee Police Ass'n v. FlynnCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2017
- Ferraro v. KoelschWisconsin Supreme Court · 1985
52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.