Chris promises Doreen $40,000 if she graduates fro Eagle College. Doreen enrolls in Eagle, attends full-time for four years, and graduates. When Doreen asks Chris for $40,000, Chris says, "I don't remember promising you $40,000. But if there was a promise, it's not enforceable, because we didn't bargain for it. And, even if there was a promise that would otherwise be enforceable, I revoke it now."

Can Doreen enforce Chris's "promise"? Why or why not?

Doreen enforce Chris's "promise" because the promise is binding despite that there was no bargain.

Explanation:

The doctrine of promissory estoppel (or detrimental reliance) gives a person that depends on the promise of another the opportunity to recover in the absence of consideration if:

1. There was definite and clear promise.

2. It was justifiable to rely on the promise.

3. The person who made the promise had the reason to believe that the person who is promised would depend on the promise.

4. There was a noticeable and definite change in character as a result of the reliance on the promise.

5. Enforcement of the promise would make justice to be better served.

Since all the conditions listed above holds in the question, Doreen enforce Chris's "promise" because the promise is binding despite that there was no bargain.