{"id":612,"date":"2011-08-19T11:35:12","date_gmt":"2011-08-19T15:35:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/?p=612"},"modified":"2012-07-27T10:05:24","modified_gmt":"2012-07-27T14:05:24","slug":"alaska-democratic-party-v-rice","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/alaska-democratic-party-v-rice\/","title":{"rendered":"Alaska Democratic Party v. Rice, 934 P.2d 1313 (1997)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Case Name: <\/strong>Alaska Democratic Party v. Rice<br \/>\n<strong>Plaintiff\/Appellee: <\/strong>Kathleen<strong> <\/strong>Rice<br \/>\n<strong>Defendant\/Appellant: <\/strong>Greg Wakefield and Alaska Democratic Party<br \/>\n<strong>Citation: <\/strong>934 P.2d 1313 (1997)<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>Issue: <\/strong>Whether the doctrine of promissory estoppel can be invoked to enforce an oral contract that falls within the <a title=\"When does the Statute of Frauds apply?\" href=\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/when-is-a-contract-subject-to-the-statute-of-frauds\/\">Statute of Frauds<\/a>.<br \/>\n<strong><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Key Facts: <\/strong>Ms. Rice contended that Mr. Wakefield (the chair-elect of the Alaska Democratic Party) offered her a two-year position as executive director of the party. Because of this offer she quit her current employment and moved from Maryland to Alaska.<br \/>\nNo written contract was entered into between Rice and the defendants.<br \/>\nRice brought two claims: (1) promissory estoppel and (2) misrepresentation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Procedural Posture: <\/strong>The jury awarded a total of $30,422 ($28,864 on her promissory estoppel claim and $1,558 on her misrepresentation claim)<\/p>\n<p><strong>Judgment: <\/strong>The court affirmed the claims but reduced the recovery to $28,864 \u2013 the amount that represents only lost wages and benefits.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Reasoning: <\/strong>\u201cThe purpose of the Statute of Frauds is to prevent fraud by requiring that certain categories of contracts be reduced to writing. However, it is not intended as an escape route for persons seeking to avoid obligations undertaken by or imposed upon them.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Case Name: Alaska Democratic Party v. Rice Plaintiff\/Appellee: Kathleen Rice Defendant\/Appellant: Greg Wakefield and Alaska Democratic Party Citation: 934 P.2d 1313 (1997) &nbsp; Issue: Whether the doctrine of promissory estoppel can be invoked to enforce an oral contract that falls within the Statute of Frauds. Key Facts: Ms. Rice contended that Mr. Wakefield (the chair-elect &hellip; <\/p>\n<p class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/alaska-democratic-party-v-rice\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;Alaska Democratic Party v. Rice, 934 P.2d 1313 (1997)&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[81,13],"tags":[35,78,34],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v15.1.1 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Alaska Democratic Party v. Rice, 934 P.2d 1313 (1997) -<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Case brief for Alaska Democratic Party v. Rice, 934 P.2d 1313 (1997). Issue: Whether the doctrine of promissory estoppel can be invoked to enforce an oral contract that falls within the Statute of Frauds.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/alaska-democratic-party-v-rice\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Alaska Democratic Party v. Rice, 934 P.2d 1313 (1997) -\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Case brief for Alaska Democratic Party v. Rice, 934 P.2d 1313 (1997). Issue: Whether the doctrine of promissory estoppel can be invoked to enforce an oral contract that falls within the Statute of Frauds.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/alaska-democratic-party-v-rice\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"MiB Law\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-08-19T15:35:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2012-07-27T14:05:24+00:00\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/#website\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/\",\"name\":\"MiB Law\",\"description\":\"Lawschool Notes and Outlines\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/?s={search_term_string}\",\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/alaska-democratic-party-v-rice\/#webpage\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/alaska-democratic-party-v-rice\/\",\"name\":\"Alaska Democratic Party v. Rice, 934 P.2d 1313 (1997) -\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-19T15:35:12+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2012-07-27T14:05:24+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/#\/schema\/person\/14950d73730da8ecbd5b2d2690155373\"},\"description\":\"Case brief for Alaska Democratic Party v. Rice, 934 P.2d 1313 (1997). Issue: Whether the doctrine of promissory estoppel can be invoked to enforce an oral contract that falls within the Statute of Frauds.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/alaska-democratic-party-v-rice\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/#\/schema\/person\/14950d73730da8ecbd5b2d2690155373\",\"name\":\"Andrew\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/#personlogo\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/1.gravatar.com\/avatar\/7e4456f2e886e2b22adb13ba439e70ed?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Andrew\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/\",\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/miblaw\"]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/612"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=612"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/612\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":614,"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/612\/revisions\/614"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=612"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=612"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.miblaw.com\/lawschool\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=612"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}