(1) A promise is a manifestation of intention to act or refrain from acting . . . so made as to justify a promisee in understanding that a commitment has been made.
(2) The person manifesting the intention is the promisor.
(3) The person to whom the manifestation is addressed is the promisee....
Comment b. Manifestation of intention.... The phrase "manifestation of intention" adopts an external or objective standard for interpreting conduct; it means the external expression of intention as distinguished from undisclosed intention. A promisor manifests an intention if he believes or has reason to believe that the promisee will infer that intention from his words or conduct.Back in the 1990s, Pepsi ran the following television advertisement:
In Leonard v. Pepsico, Inc., 88 F. Supp. 2d 116 (S.D.N.Y. 1999), aff ’d, 210 F.3d 88 (2d Cir. 2000), the plaintiff asserted the right to buy a Harrier jet plane for 15 Pepsi points and $700,000. The Pepsi points, as described in defendant’s catalog, were also available for purchase at ten cents apiece; apparently, plaintiff had actually raised $700,000 ‘‘through acquaintances’’which he asserted to be the equivalent of 7 million points.
Would the plaintiff have been entitled to the value of the t-shirt, the leather jacket, or the sunglasses? What about the Harrier Jet? Without referring to the opinion (discussed on page 33 of you Casebook and set forth in full at the link above), how would you justify your answers?