Summary
explaining that "where an enforceable contract exists, courts have found that applying the doctrine of promissory estoppel would be inappropriate" and therefore dismissing promissory estoppel claim because the dispute was limited only to the contractual obligations of the two parties
Summary of this case from Gillespie v. DringOpinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:12-CV-72
04-03-2012
TIMOTHY M. KUMP, Plaintiff, v. STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Defendant.
(JUDGE CAPUTO)
ORDER
NOW, this 3rd day of April, 2012, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant State Farm Fire and Casualty Company's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. 3.) is GRANTED.
________________
A. Richard Caputo
United States District Judge