equitable estoppel

The doctrine by which a person may be precluded by his act or conduct, or silence when it is his duty to speak, from asserting a right which he otherwise would have had. Mitchell v. Mclntee, 15 Or.App. 85, 514 P.2d 1357, 1359.

The effect of voluntary conduct of a party whereby he is precluded from asserting rights against another who has justifiably relied upon such conduct and changed his position so that he will suffer injury if the former is allowed to repudiate the conduct. American Bank & Trust Co. v. Trinity Universal Ins. Co., 251 La. 445, 205 So.2d 35, 40.

Elements or essentials of such estoppel include change of position for the worse by party asserting estoppel, Malone v. Republic Nat. Bank & Trust Co., Tex.Civ. App., 70 S.W.2d 809, 812;

conduct by party estopped such that it would be contrary to equity and good conscience for him to allege and prove the truth, Rody v. Doyle, 181 Md. 195, 29 A.2d 290, 293;

false representation or concealment of facts, Clark v. National Aid Life Ass'n, 177 Okl. 137, 57 P.2d 832, 833;

ignorance of party asserting estoppel of facts and absence of opportunity to ascertain them, Fipps v. Stidham, 174 Okl. 473, 50 P.2d 680, 684;

injury from declarations, acts, or omissions of party were he permitted to gainsay their truth, Fleishbein v. Western Auto Supply Agency, 19 Cal.App.2d 424, 65 P.2d 928;

intention that representation should be acted on, Consolidated Cut Stone Co. v. Seidenbach, 181 Okl. 578, 75 P.2d 442, 452;

knowledge, actual or constructive, of facts by party estopped, Antrim Lumber Co. v. Wagner, 175 Okl. 564, 54 P.2d 173, 176; Lillywhite v. Coleman, 46 Ariz. 523, 52 P.2d 1157, 1160;

misleading person to his prejudice, United States, for Use and Benefit of Noland Co., v. Wood, C.C.A.Va., 99 F.2d 80, 82;

omission, misconduct or misrepresentation misleading another. It is based on some affirmative action, by word or conduct, of the person against whom it is invoked, and some action of the other party, relying on the representations made. George W. Armbruster, Jr., Inc. v. City of Wildwood, D.C.N.J., 41 F.2d 823, 829.

Estoppel in pais and equitable estoppel are convertible terms. Brown v. Corn Exchange Nat. Bank & Trust Co., 136 N.J.Eq. 430, 42 A.2d 474, 480

See quasi estoppel

- estoppel in pais