On March 10, Martin entered into an oral contract with Wilson. Under the oral contract, they agreed that Wilson will work for Martin for two years for a salary of $50,000 per year. Wilson quit his job the next day so that he could join Martin. But on March 12, Martin called Wilson and repudiated the contract, stating that he had decided not to hire him after all. If Wilson decides to sue, which of the following is most likely to be true?
A. Oral contracts are completely voidable and have no weight in the court.
B. Wilson cannot sue Martin because there was no written contract.
C. Wilson can sue Martin for false imprisonment and unintentional tort because Wilson did not have a written contract, and this becomes the best alternate course of action.
D. Wilson may use the doctrine of promissory estoppel to show that he had materially relied on the oral promise and will suffer serious losses if the promise is not enforced.
Answer: D
You might also like to view...
Mini-Case Question. Which of the four types of brand names does OrganicDrinks best represent?
A) a functional name B) an invented name C) a morpheme name D) an evocative name E) a founder name
Every public company has an obligation to deal frankly, comprehensively, and immediately with any information that is considered ________ for a decision to buy, sell, or even hold the organization's stock
A) inside information B) material C) immaterial D) a mandate
A __________ layout is used for products that remain stationary during their assembly/construction.
What will be an ideal response?
In a factoring arrangement, the bank lends the business money using inventory as collateral.
Answer the following statement true (T) or false (F)