When a general contractor relies on a subcontractor's bid to prepare its prime bid, the sub generally:
Explanation
When a general reasonably and foreseeably relies on a sub's bid in submitting its own, Drennan v. Star Paving holds the sub to that bid under promissory estoppel, even with nothing signed. Free withdrawal after award is exactly what the doctrine prevents, because the general is already committed at its own bid price. A signed subcontract is not the trigger — reliance is, which is the whole point of the doctrine. And no fixed ten-day acceptance window exists at common law; what matters is whether the general relied within a reasonable time.
Law Reference: Promissory estoppel; Drennan v. Star Paving Co. (1958) 51 Cal.2d 409This topic, taught in full in the CSLB Law & Business guide. CSLB Law & Business — Complete Study Guide (2026) — PDF + EPUB, $24.99 · 14-day refund →
Practice all 1632 questions free — no signup required.
Own the complete CSLB Law & Business guide — PDF + EPUB, $24.99 →
Related questions on this topic
- A contractor completes $80,000 of work in a billing period. The contract provides for 5% retention. How much should the contractor expect to receive for this progress payment?
- The primary purpose of job costing during a project is to:
- A job was estimated at $40,000 in labor but actual labor came in at $48,000. This $8,000 difference is BEST described as:
- The practice of a general contractor revealing one subcontractor's bid to a competitor to obtain a lower price is called:
- A contractor discovers a $20,000 arithmetic error in its bid one hour after submitting it, before any contract is signed. The contractor's BEST course of action is to:
- In project organization, the document that defines exactly what work is and is NOT included in a contract is the:
Last reviewed: · editorial process