The Nebraska Supreme Court rendered an opinion in Synergy4 Enterprises, Inc v Pinnacle Bank, 290 Neb.241 (2015), in which the court held that claims asserted by a borrower in the form of promissory estoppel, negligent misrepresentation, and fraud arising out of an alleged oral promise to make a loan were barred by the Nebraska Written Credit Agreement Statute of Frauds (Neb.Rev.Stat. Section 45-1,112 et.seq.). In the Pinnacle case, the court held that “Section 45-1,113 supersedes the common law theory of promissory estoppel in so far as it applies to unwritten credit agreements or oral promises to loan money or extend credit.” The court further found that “The plain language of Section 45-1,113 prohibits an action based on a credit agreement unless the credit agreement is in writing. Our review finds no exception or limitation in the statute’s language.”
In rendering its decision, the court noted: This conclusion is supported by the broad language in the definition of credit agreements, which includes any “contract, promise, undertaking, offer, or commitment to loan money or to grant or extend credit.” This precludes recovery for a credit agreement based on the promissory estoppel doctrine, which is wholly dependent on reliance on a promise or assurance.
The court also concluded that Section 45-1,113 bars claims for negligent misrepresentation indicating that “Regardless of whether the present cause of action is labeled as a breach of contract, misrepresentation, fraud, deceit [or] promissory estoppel, its substance is that of an action upon an agreement by a bank to loan money. Therefore [the credit agreement statute of frauds] applies.”