Chapter 9-5 Detrimental Reliance as Independent Tort Claim

• Jurisdiction: United States

9-5 Detrimental Reliance as Independent Tort Claim

9-5:1 Overview

Detrimental reliance occurs when a person reasonably relies upon another's representation to that person's detriment.²⁶ However, detrimental reliance is merely an element of another tort or contract cause of action, rather than an independent tort.²⁷At its most extreme, one person's detrimental reliance upon another is treated as a Promissory Estoppel, effectively creating a contract where no express contract actually existed.²⁸

9-5:1.1 Related Causes of Action

Promissory Estoppel, Fraud: Common Law Fraud, Fraud: Fraud by Non-disclosure, Fraud: Statutory Fraud, Oil and Gas Litigation: Fraud

MUST READ CASES

Garner v. Corpus Christi Nat'l Bank, 944 S.W.2d 469 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1997, writ denied), holding modified by Allied Capital Corp. v. Cravens, 67 S.W.3d 486 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2002, no pet.)

University of Tex. Sys. v. Courtney, 946 S.W.2d 464 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1997, writ denied)

9-5:2 Expressly Rejected in Texas

The Supreme Court of Texas has not expressly rejected detrimental reliance as an independent tort, but several courts of appeals have.²⁹ Despite these courts' holdings, it appears that similar facts would support the contract-based cause of action for Promissory Estoppel.³⁰

--------

Notes:

^[26] English v. Fischer, 660 S.W.2d 521, 524 (Tex. 1983); Wheeler v. White, 398 S.W.2d 93, 96 (Tex. 1965); Adams v. Petrade Int'l, Inc., 754 S.W.2d 696, 708 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1988, writ denied) (case discussing reasonable reliance).

^[27] Garner v. Corpus Christi Nat'l Bank, 944 S.W.2d 469, 480 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1997, writ denied), holding modified by Allied Capital Corp. v. Cravens, 67 S.W.3d 486 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2002, no pet.).

^[28] Roberts v. GeosourceDrilling Servs., Inc., 757 S.W.2d 48, 50 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1988, no writ).

^[29] Garner v. Corpus Christi Nat'l Bank, 944 S.W.2d 469, 480 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1997, writ denied), holding modified by Allied Capital Corp. v. Cravens, 67 S.W.3d 486 (Tex. App.— Corpus Christi 2002, no pet.); University of Tex. Sys. v. Courtney, 946 S.W.2d 464, 468 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1997, no pet.).

^[30] See English v. Fischer, 660 S.W.2d 521, 524 (Tex. 1983); See also, Ford v. City State Bank of Palacios, 44 S.W.3d 121, 138 (Tex. App.—-Corpus Christi 2001); Chapter 4: Promissory Estoppel.