Also known as: estoppel theories · estoppel
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An equitable doctrine preventing a party from denying a prior representation or position when another has reasonably relied on it to their detriment.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
After Edward Everett was acquitted of robbing one victim because the jury found he was not the perpetrator, the state attempted to prosecute him for robbing a second victim in the same incident. The court applied estoppel theory to bar the second prosecution because the identity issue had already been finally determined against the state.
Ethan Evans, a network engineer for Everest Holdings, assured a customer that the company would provide discounted service with priority restoration. The customer reconfigured its systems in reliance. Estoppel theory protected the customer even though the pricing terms exceeded Evans's actual authority.
Erika Echevarria purchased a lot in a recorded general-plan development from Edgewater Capital. Although the deed did not expressly grant parking rights, the developer had represented unified amenities. Estoppel theory entitled Echevarria to use the shared parking created for the plan.
Ella Emerson conveyed a parcel by warranty deed before she owned it. When she later acquired the parcel, estoppel theory passed title directly to the grantee, preventing Emerson from denying she had ownership at the time of the original conveyance.
Enzo Eastwood financed and directed an earlier suit challenging a fee schedule in which he held a direct financial interest. After the court upheld the fees, estoppel theory prevented Eastwood from relitigating the same issue in his own later action.
Eugene Ellsworth and one co-owner of a parcel signed an agreement creating a no-build zone. The other co-owners remained silent during negotiations. Estoppel theory allowed the beneficiary to enforce the servitude against Ellsworth even though not all owners joined the attempt.
Estoppel theory protects a child who has relied on a representation of adoption even without proof of a formal agreement, while contract theory requires evidence of an adoption contract that can be specifically performed.
The child must demonstrate a representation that adoption had occurred or would occur, reasonable reliance on that representation, and resulting detriment if the representation is now denied.
No. The theory focuses on the parents' representations and the child's reliance rather than on the filing of formal adoption papers.
…rights to a federal forum "because state administrative agency determinations do not create res judicata or collateral estoppel effects. The exhaustion of state administrative remedies postpones rather than precludes the assertion of federal jurisdiction." Comment, Exhaustion of State Administrative Remedies in…