BETHLEHEM AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT v. ZHOU
MEMORANDUM AND/OR OPINION ORDER THAT THE DEFT'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON HER BREACH OF COUNTERCLAIM (DOC. #90) IS GRANTED. THE DEFT'S BREACH OF PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL CLAIM (COUNTERCLAIM COUNT III) IS DISMISSED AS MOOT. SIGNED BY HONORABLE J. WILLIAM DITTER, JR ON 3/19/2012; 3/20/2012 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO PRO SE, E-MAILED.(tomg, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
BETHLEHEM AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT,
AND NOW, this 19th
day of March, 2012, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
1. The defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment on her breach of counterclaim
(Dkt. 90) is GRANTED.
2. Defendant is awarded nominal damages of $1 and shall be permitted to present
evidence of actual damages at trial. Defendant cannot claim attorneys’ fees as actual damages.
3. The District may not call the mediator, William Haussmann, to testify and may not
introduce evidence of his deposition testimony at trial.
4. The District may not present evidence of statements made during the mediation.
However, at trial, the District may seek reconsideration of my order barring such statements in
light of the testimony presented.
5. The defendant’s breach of promissory estoppel claim (Counterclaim Count III) is
DISMISSED as moot.3
BY THE COURT:
/s/ J. William Ditter, Jr.
J. WILLIAM DITTER, JR., J.
Promissory estoppel claims permit a plaintiff to enforce an agreement in the absence of
consideration. See Sullivan v. Chartwell Inv. Partners, LP, 873 A.2d 710, 717 (Pa. Super. Ct.
2005). Because I find there was consideration, and therefore an enforceable contract, the claim
for promissory estoppel must be dismissed.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?