Join our Law Notes WhatsApp Group and stay updated with Legal and Judicial Updates

Estoppel

From Lawnotes.in
(Redirected from Doctrine of Estoppel)
Jump to:navigation, search

Estoppel is derived from the French word estoupe which means 'stopped'.

  • The word made into English jurisprudence to shut the mouth a person who has pleaded, acted or spoken the truth on one occasion and tried to avoid, evade his own pleading, action or speech later with a mala fide.
  • In Law, estoppel is a preclusion preventing a man alleging or denying a fact in consequence of his own previous act.
  • The Doctrine of Estoppel is an rule of evidence.
  • Estoppel by Election: An estoppel which arises by a choice between inconsistent remedies. Aladdin Temple Ben. Ass'n, D. 0. K. K. v. American Standard Life Ins. Co., 235 Ala. 431, 179 So. 243, 245
    • The doctrine of "estoppel by election" against beneficiary who has elected to take favorable provisions of will from objecting to other provisions of will applies only where will undertakes to bestow a gift and also deprive donee of a prior existing right, thus confronting devisee with alternative of accepting devise and renouncing prior right or of retaining latter and renouncing devise. Mason & Mason v. Brown, Tex.Civ.App., 182 S.W.2d 729, 733.
  • A man's own act or acceptance stops or closes his mouth to allege or plead the truth. Caulfield v. Noonan, 229 Iowa 955, 295 N. W. 466, 471; Williams v. Edwards, 163 Okl, 246, 22 P.2d 1026.
  • An estoppel arises when one is concluded and forbidden by law to speak against his own act or deed. Gural v. Engle, 128 N,J.L, 252, 25 A.2d 257, 261; an inconsistent position, attitude or course of conduct may not be adopted to loss or injury of another. Brand v. Farmers Mut. Protective Ass'n of Texas, Tex.Civ.App., 95 S.W.2d 994, 997.
  • Estoppel is a bar or impediment which precludes allegation or denial of a certain fact or state of facts, in consequence of previous allegation or denial or conduct or admission, or in consequence of a final adjudication of the matter in a court of law, Lewis v. King, 157 La. 718, 103 So. 19, 22; Agoodash Achim of Ithaca v. Temple Beth- 147 Misc, 405, 263 N.Y.S. 81; Chernick V. National. Surety Co.: 50 R.I. 419, 148 A. 418, 419
  • An equitable doctrine to accomplish justice, Sisson v. Swift, 243 Ala. 289, 9 So.2d 891, 903; Elowe v. Superior Fire Ins. Co., 307 Ill, App, 569, 30 N.E.2d 953, 958;
  • Preclusion by act or conduct from asserting right which might otherwise have existed. Reynolds v. Travelers' ins. Co. 176 Wash. 36, 28 P.2d 310, 314; Tucker v. Brown, 20 Wash.2d 740, 150 P.2d 604, 652
  • Preclusion from alleging or denying fact because of previous action, inaction, allegation, or denial. Steph.P1. 239; Spear v. Farwell, 5 Cal.App.2d 111, 42 P.2d 391, 392; Scholl v. Scholl, 123 Ohio St. 1, 173 N.E. 305, 306
  • Preclusion from denying truth of fact which has in contemplation of law become settled by acts and proceedings of judicial or legislative officers, or by act of party himself, either by conventional writing or by representations, express or implied in pais, May v. City of Kearney, 145 Neb. 475, 17 N.W.2d 448, 458;
  • Shield for defense but not a weapon of attack, United States, to Use of Noland Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co., D.C.Md., 38 F.Supp. 479, 484. It is available only for protection, and cannot be used as a weapon of assault. Stanio V. Berner Lohne Co., 127 Conn, 431, 17 A.2d 502, 504
  • It operates to put party entitled to its benefits in same position as if thing represented were true. May v. City of Kearney, 145 Neb. 475, 17 N.W.2d 448, 458.
  • Under law of "estoppel" where one of two innocent persons must suffer, he whose act occasioned loss must bear it. Buxbaum v. Assicurazioni General!, 175 Misc. 785, 25 N.Y.S.2d 357, 360; Sackenreuther v. Winston, Tex.Civ. App., 137 S.W.2d 93, 96.

Related Maxims

Related Cases / Recent Cases / Case Law

  • Gibson vs Gibson, 8 Am Dec 94: Estoppel is a restrain or impediment, imposed by the policy, of the law, to preclude a party from averring the truth.
  • Graham vs Asbury, 112 Ariz. 184
  • Auling and Odgers JJ, K Kotayya (dead) and another - Defendante - Appellant (AIR 1924 Mad 177)

Relevant Acts / Sections

Related Topics