Drennan v. Star Paving: Difference between revisions

Mr. Drennan was a contractor looking for a sub-contractor to help him win a local school's construction project.

Each sub-contractor would submit a bid to fulfill a portion of the contract. Drennan would use those bids to put together his overall bid to the school.

Defendant (Star Paving company; "Star Paving") bid on a job for Plaintiff ("Drennan), which accepted Defendant's bid (it was the cheapest bid for $7,000).

The school hired Drennan to complete the construction.

Star Paving then said that its bid was a mistake and wasn't supposed to be so low. Suddenly, Star Paving said his sub-contract needed $15,000 for fulfillment.

Drennan was forced to seek new bids.

Can Plaintiff seek, as damages, the difference between Defendant's initial winning bid and how much Plaintiff was eventually required to pay?

Yes, Plaintiff is entitled to damages. Defendant's bid is enforceable under promissory estoppel. Defendant had reason to expect Plaintiff to rely on the bid.

You will be bound to a promise if you reasonably expect that the promise will cause the promisee to act in reliance to his detriment, and it actually does cause them to act, if enforcing the promise is necessary to avoid an injustice.