This Note proposes that an award of lost profits under promissory estoppel should be made only when the circumstances surrounding the making of the promise justify enforcing it as if it were a contract. Operating on the assumption that a promise is found to be a reasonable basis for reliance, this Note will propose some criteria by which a court can determine when a promise justifies a damage award in excess of the costs of reliance. These criteria will then be applied to the Farm Crop facts to demonstrate that remedies can be administered under a standard that is rational and flexible, yet provides reasonable certainty.
Glen Andrew Anderson, Farm Crop Energy v. Old National Bank: A Meaningful Test for Damages Under Promissory Estoppel?, 10 SEATTLE U. L. REV. 277 (1987).