Drennan v. Star Paving Co.

51 Cal. 2d 409 · California Supreme Court · 1958

Facts

Plaintiff, a general contractor, received a subcontractor's paving bid of $7,131.60 from defendant. Relying on this bid, plaintiff incorporated it into his own successful bid for a school construction project. The next day, defendant refused to perform the paving work for the bid price, claiming a mistake, forcing plaintiff to hire another company for $10,948.60.

Procedural history

Defendant appealed from a judgment for plaintiff in an action to recover damages. The trial court found that defendant made a definite offer and that plaintiff relied on it, entering judgment for plaintiff in the amount of $3,817 plus costs. This court affirmed the trial court's judgment.

Issue

Did plaintiff's detrimental reliance on defendant's subcontractor bid make the offer irrevocable under the doctrine of promissory estoppel, even without formal acceptance or consideration, thereby binding the defendant to its original bid?

Holding

Yes, the court affirmed the judgment for the plaintiff, holding that the defendant's offer was made irrevocable by the plaintiff's detrimental reliance, and the defendant is liable for the difference in cost.

Rule

A promise which the promisor should reasonably expect to induce definite and substantial action or forbearance by the promisee, and which does induce such action or forbearance, is binding if injustice can be avoided only by enforcement of the promise (Restatement of Contracts § 90).

Read the full opinion on CourtListener

Case brief last reviewed 2026-04-18. Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.