In DiLorenzo V

In DiLorenzo v. Valve & Primer Corporation , the court held:

A) DiLorenzo gave consideration for the stock option.
B) Valve & Primer conditioned the alleged stock option on DiLorenzo's promise to remain in its employment.
C) promissory estoppel applied because there was detrimental reliance on DiLorenzo's part.
D) there was no consideration for the stock option, and promissory estoppel did not apply because detrimental reliance was not proven.