A QUESTION OF ETHICS: Promissory Estoppel. John Sasson and Emily Springer met in January 2002. John.

A QUESTION OF ETHICS: Promissory Estoppel. John Sasson and
Emily Springer met in January 2002. John worked for the U.S. Army as an
engineer. Emily was an attorney with a law fi rm. Six months later, John bought
a townhouse in Randolph, New Jersey, and asked Emily to live with him. She
agreed but retained the ownership of her home in Monmouth Beach. John paid the
mortgage and the other expenses on the townhouse. He urged Emily to quit her
job and work from our house. In May 2003, Emily took Johns advice and
started her own law practice. In December, John made her the benefi ciary of

A QUESTION OF ETHICS: Promissory Estoppel. John Sasson and
Emily Springer met in January 2002. John worked for the U.S. Army as an
engineer. Emily was an attorney with a law fi rm. Six months later, John bought
a townhouse in Randolph, New Jersey, and asked Emily to live with him. She
agreed but retained the ownership of her home in Monmouth Beach. John paid the
mortgage and the other expenses on the townhouse. He urged Emily to quit her
job and work from our house. In May 2003, Emily took Johns advice and
started her own law practice. In December, John made her the benefi ciary of
his $150,000 individual retirement account (IRA) and said that he would give
her his 2002 BMW M3 car before the end of the next year. He proposed to her in
September 2004, giving her a diamond engagement ring and promising to take
care of her for the rest of her life. Less than a month later, John was
critically injured by an accidental blow to his head during a basketball game
and died. On behalf of Johns estate, which was valued at $1.1 million, his
brother Steven fi led a complaint in a New Jersey state court to have Emily evicted
from the townhouse. Given these facts, consider the following questions. [ In
re Estate of Sasson, 387 N.J.Super. 459, 904 A.2d 769 (App.Div. 2006)]

(a) Based on Johns promise to take care of her for the
rest of her life, Emily claimed that she was entitled to the townhouse, the
BMW, and an additional portion of Johns estate. Under what circumstances would
such a promise constitute a valid, enforceable contract? Does Johns promise
meet these requirements? Why or why not? (b) Whether or not Johns promise is
legally binding, is there an ethical basis on which it should be enforced? Is
there an ethical basis for not enforcing it? Are there any circumstances under
which a promise of support should beor should not be enforced? Discuss.