Definition
"Promise of" is a truncated legal phrase that does not stand alone as a term of art but functions as a prefix to a larger legal concept, most commonly appearing in two distinct contexts:
1. BREACH OF PROMISE OF MARRIAGE: A common law cause of action arising when one party to an engagement agreement fails to fulfill a promise to marry. The action sounds in contract: an offer to marry, acceptance, and subsequent refusal to perform constituted the breach. Damages could include pecuniary loss, injury to feelings, and social humiliation.
2. PROMISE OF EMPLOYMENT (IMPLIED): In employment law, representations made by an employer — through handbooks, written policies, oral statements, or course of conduct — that may give rise to an implied contractual obligation. When an employer promises job security or specific disciplinary procedures and then acts contrary to those representations, courts in many jurisdictions recognize a claim for breach of implied contract.
In historical legal usage, "promise of" almost always appears in the phrase "promise of marriage," and that is the dominant sense in the classical dictionaries. The employment law sense is a later development of the twentieth century.
---
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): "Promise of" in ordinary English means an indication or suggestion that something will happen — "a promise of rain," "a promise of better days." It carries connotations of expectation and potential, not necessarily binding obligation.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): "Promise" is defined as "a declaration, written or verbal, made by one person to another, which binds the person who makes it to do, or to forbear, some specific act, and gives to the person to whom made a right to expect or claim the performance or forbearance of the act." The 1913 definition already imports legal weight, but common usage allowed for the casual, non-binding sense as well.
The gap matters: In ordinary speech, a "promise of" something may be casual, aspirational, or even metaphorical. In law, once the phrase attaches to "marriage" or "employment," courts ask whether a binding obligation was created — a question governed by contract formation doctrine, not the ordinary understanding of the word. Researchers should not import the colloquial softness of "promise" into their reading of historical legal texts.
---
Common Confusion
Two pitfalls appear regularly in research involving this phrase:
First, "promise of marriage" and "agreement to marry" were often used interchangeably in older pleadings and treatises, but the underlying legal theory was always contractual. Some early writers framed the action in tort (for the injury to the plaintiff's feelings and reputation), and courts were not always consistent. Researchers reading nineteenth-century material should note which framing the source adopts.
Second, "promise of employment" in modern employment law must be distinguished from an express employment contract. The implied contract theory rests on employer representations — handbook language, policy statements, oral assurances — not on a formal signed agreement. Conflating the two leads to misreading the strength of the employee's claim and the applicable remedies.
---
Why It Matters in Research
For historical corpus research: "Promise of" almost never appears alone in classical legal dictionaries. Rapalje & Lawrence index it as a cross-reference entry directing the reader to "Breach of Promise of Marriage" — a signal that the phrase is a navigational fragment, not a standalone concept. Researchers encountering "promise of" in historical indexes, headnotes, or pleadings should treat it as a pointer and follow the full compound phrase.
For breach of promise of marriage specifically: This cause of action was largely abolished or sharply curtailed in the United States during the mid-twentieth century through "heart balm" statutes. A researcher reading cases from the 1800s or early 1900s will find an active, vigorously litigated cause of action; reading the same jurisdiction's law after roughly 1935–1950 may reveal the action has been abolished by statute. The corpus date of a source is therefore critical. Do not assume continuity.
For employment law: The implied contract theory built on employer promises emerged primarily after wrongful termination litigation expanded in the 1970s and 1980s. Sources predating this period will not address handbook promises or policy-based implied contracts in the modern sense. The Law Mind Employment encyclopedia entry on Breach of Implied Contract covers this development and is the appropriate starting point for that line of research.
Cross-corpus connection: Both the marriage promise and the employment promise contexts share a core analytical move — courts ask whether the circumstances would lead a reasonable person to believe a binding commitment had been made. That standard appears across contract law more broadly and connects "promise of" research to general offer-and-acceptance doctrine.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Rapalje & Lawrence treat "Promise of" purely as a cross-reference, directing users to "Breach § 4. Marriage, Breach of Promise of." The only substantive note is procedural: in an action for breach of promise of marriage, an express promise need not be proved — circumstantial evidence of mutual understanding suffices. The citation to 2 Starkie on Evidence (n. 942) reflects early nineteenth-century English authority. This is a meaningful procedural point: it relaxes the proof burden compared to ordinary contract claims and explains why these actions were relatively accessible to plaintiffs in the period.
What Rapalje & Lawrence do not address — and what a researcher should not expect to find in classical dictionaries — is any treatment of promises arising from employment relationships or employer handbooks. That entire body of doctrine postdates the classical dictionary era by many decades.
---
Jurisdictional Note
Breach of promise of marriage has been abolished in most U.S. jurisdictions by heart balm statutes, but the action survives in a small number of states and remains active in several common law jurisdictions outside the United States. Employment-based implied promise claims vary significantly by state: some jurisdictions follow the traditional employment-at-will rule strictly and are skeptical of handbook-based claims; others recognize robust implied contract theories from employer representations.
---
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
Breach of Implied Contract — Handbooks, Policies, and Promises (Law Mind Employment & Labor Law Encyclopedia)
---