Business Law: Alternative Theories for Enforcing Contracts

The video tutorial explores two alternative theories for enforcing promises when no valid contract exists: quasi-contract and promissory estoppel. Quasi-contract applies when one party is unjustly enriched by another's actions without fair compensation, as illustrated by a mistaken delivery of a diamond ring. Promissory estoppel involves enforcing a promise when one party relies on it to their detriment, exemplified by a broken promise from an uncle to support an aspiring artist. Both theories aim to prevent injustice in the absence of a formal contract.

In what situations might one party be unjustly enriched according to the text?

What are the two conditions that must be met for a promise to be enforced under promissory estoppel?

How does the text illustrate the concept of promissory estoppel with the example of Uncle Vinny?