John J. Lotito, Jr. v. Knife River Corporation-South and Knife River Corporation
2012 Tex. App. LEXIS 9340
| Tex. App. | 2012Background
- Lotito sued Knife River Corp-South and Knife River Corp after his employment was terminated.
- He alleged promissory estoppel: a Texas employment promise to four years there and four more years after relocation to California.
- He also alleged breach of contract to pay a bonus and for unused vacation days.
- Knife River moved for summary judgment (no-evidence and traditional) and the trial court granted the traditional motion on promissory estoppel and denied it on breach.
- Lotito nonsuited all claims except promissory estoppel, and the trial court entered a final judgment for Knife River.
- The court affirmed, holding promissory estoppel is not an independent claim in the employment context.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is promissory estoppel an independent employment claim? | Lotito argues promissory estoppel can support affirmative relief. | Knife River argues promissory estoppel is a defense, not an affirmative employment claim. | Promissory estoppel is not an independent employment claim. |
| Was Lotito's reliance on the alleged oral promise reasonable as a matter of law? | Lotito contends reliance was reasonable and justified. | Knife River asserts reliance was unreasonable given no written promise and indefinite termination risk. | Reliance was unreasonable as a matter of law. |
Key Cases Cited
- Frost Crushed Stone Co. v. Odell Geer Constr. Co., 110 S.W.3d 41 (Tex.App.-Waco 2002) (promissory estoppel elements and reliance in construction context)
- Sonnichsen v. Baylor Univ., 47 S.W.3d 122 (Tex.App.-Waco 2001) (promissory estoppel as helmet not sword in employment)
- Leach v. Conoco, Inc., 892 S.W.2d 954 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1995) (statute of frauds and promissory estoppel in employment context)
- Collins v. Allied Pharmacy Mgmnt., Inc., 871 S.W.2d 929 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1994) (promissory estoppel and fraud defenses in employment)
- Webber v. M.W. Kellogg Co., 720 S.W.2d 124 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1986) (writing requirement and promissory estoppel foundations)
- Moore Burger, Inc. v. Phillips Petroleum Co., 492 S.W.2d 934 (Tex. 1973) (statute of frauds defense and promissory estoppel origin)
- Wheeler v. White, 398 S.W.2d 93 (Tex. 1966) (foreseeable and definite reliance in absence of contract)
- Stanley v. Citi-Financial Mortg. Co., 121 S.W.3d 811 (Tex.App.-Beaumont 2003) (employment promissory estoppel and defenses)
- Robbins v. Payne, 55 S.W.3d 740 (Tex.App.-Amarillo 2001) (promissory estoppel limitations in employment)