Johanna Marra and Eric Nazzaro began a romantic relationship in October 2013. That previous July, Nazzarro had purchased a duplex that he intended to renovate. Nazzarro rented out the top floor while he and Marra lived in the bottom floor. Nazzarro and his friend worked to upgrade the home, while Marra paid for tools and supplies. The couple had different visions for the bathroom: Marra wanted a “fancy bathroom,” while Eric wanted a low-cost one. Nazzarro told Marra that if she wanted a fancy bathroom she would have to pay for it—which she did for $6,900. Marra also paid $2,500 to have two trees removed from the property’s front yard. Marra happily paid for the upgrades to the house in hopes that she and Nazzarro would one day sell the house and move to Florida.

In May 2017, Nazzarro told Marra that he was going fishing. However, he was actually leaving Marra for another woman. When Marra returned home that evening, she found a note explaining that the relationship was over. A mutual friend convinced them to have a meeting and settle their differences. At the meeting, Nazzarro told Marra that she could stay at the house until November 1, 2017, and that Nazzarro would repay her $7,000 that she spent on the house. However, Nazzarro refused to put the agreement in writing. In response, Marra constantly pestered Nazzarro with calls and texts, until Nazzarro sought and received a protection order against her. In effect, the order evicted Marra from Nazzarro’s house.

Marra and Nazzarro never married, so there was no contract governing their relationship. Nevertheless, Marra sought to recover the

$7,000, as well as two-and-a-half months’ rent in compensation for her early eviction, under the doctrine of promissory estoppel. What does Marra need to show to succeed in her claim of promissory estoppel? How did the court rule?