equitable estoppel is well established doctrine (Connecticut) · Go Syfert
← Connecticut issues

equitable estoppel is well established doctrine in Connecticut

6 Connecticut opinions name it 2 courts 2001–2019 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Connecticut courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Cowles v. Bacongreen
conn · 1852 · cited in 2 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2007–2010
2 sentences

2010The doctrine of equitable estoppel is well established. “[W]here one, by his words or actions, intentionally *695 causes another to believe in the existence of a certain state of things, and thereby induces him to act on that belief, so as injuriously to affect his previous position, he is [precluded] from averring a different state of things as existing at the time.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Johnnycake Mountain Associates v. Ochs, 104 Conn. App. 194, 208 , 932 A.2d 472 (2007), cert. denied, 286 Conn. 906 , 944 A.2d 978 (2008); see also Cowles v. Bacon, 21 Conn. 451, 467 (1852).

2007The doctrine of equitable estoppel is well established. “[W]here one, by his words or actions, intentionally causes another to believe in the existence of a certain state of things, and thereby induces him to act on that belief, so as injuriously to affect his previous position, he is concluded from averring a different state of things as existing at the time.” Cowles v. Bacon, 21 Conn. 451, 467 (1852).

22

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
Coss v. Steward green
connappct · 2011
2 sentences

2019In its general application, we have recognized that [t]here are two essential elements to an estoppel—the party must do or say something that is intended or calculated to induce another to believe in the existence of certain facts and to act upon that belief, and that the other party, influenced thereby, must actually change his position or do some act to his injury which he otherwise would not have done.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Coss v. Steward, 126 Conn. App. 30, 41 , 10 A.3d 539 (2011). ‘‘[T]here must generally be some intended deception in the conduct or declarations of the pa

2019In its general application, we have recognized that [t]here are two essential elements to an estoppel—the party must do or say something that is intended or calculated to induce another to believe in the existence of certain facts and to act upon that belief, and that the other party, influenced thereby, must actually change his position or do some act to his injury which he otherwise would not have done.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Coss v. Steward, 126 Conn. App. 30, 41 , 10 A.3d 539 (2011). ‘‘[T]here must generally be some intended deception in the conduct or declarations of the pa

12019–2019
Congress Street Condominium Ass'n v. Anderson green
connappct · 2011
2 sentences

2013We agree with the plaintiff. “[Traditional mortgage foreclosure standards . . . permit the assertion of certain special defenses, including that of equitable estoppel.” Congress Street Condominium Assn., Inc. v. Anderson, 132 Conn. App. 536, 544 , 33 A.3d 274 (2011). 6 “The doctrine of equitable estoppel is well established. [W]here one, by his words or actions, intentionally causes another to believe in the existence of a certain state of things, and thereby induces him to act on that belief, so as injuriously to affect his previous position, he is [precluded] from averring a different state

2013We agree with the plaintiff. “[Traditional mortgage foreclosure standards . . . permit the assertion of certain special defenses, including that of equitable estoppel.” Congress Street Condominium Assn., Inc. v. Anderson, 132 Conn. App. 536, 544 , 33 A.3d 274 (2011). 6 “The doctrine of equitable estoppel is well established. [W]here one, by his words or actions, intentionally causes another to believe in the existence of a certain state of things, and thereby induces him to act on that belief, so as injuriously to affect his previous position, he is [precluded] from averring a different state

12013–2013
Johnnycake Mountain Associates v. Ochs green
connappct · 2007
2 sentences

2010The doctrine of equitable estoppel is well established. “[W]here one, by his words or actions, intentionally *695 causes another to believe in the existence of a certain state of things, and thereby induces him to act on that belief, so as injuriously to affect his previous position, he is [precluded] from averring a different state of things as existing at the time.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Johnnycake Mountain Associates v. Ochs, 104 Conn. App. 194, 208 , 932 A.2d 472 (2007), cert. denied, 286 Conn. 906 , 944 A.2d 978 (2008); see also Cowles v. Bacon, 21 Conn. 451, 467 (1852).

2010The doctrine of equitable estoppel is well established. “[W]here one, by his words or actions, intentionally *695 causes another to believe in the existence of a certain state of things, and thereby induces him to act on that belief, so as injuriously to affect his previous position, he is [precluded] from averring a different state of things as existing at the time.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Johnnycake Mountain Associates v. Ochs, 104 Conn. App. 194, 208 , 932 A.2d 472 (2007), cert. denied, 286 Conn. 906 , 944 A.2d 978 (2008); see also Cowles v. Bacon, 21 Conn. 451, 467 (1852).

12010–2010
Blackwell v. Mahmood green
connappct · 2010
2 sentences

2010“The doctrine of equitable estoppel is well established. [WJhere one, by his words or actions, intentionally causes another to believe in the existence of a certain state of things, and thereby induces him to act on that belief, so as injuriously to affect his previous position, he is [precluded] from averring a different state of things as existing at the time.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Blackwell v. Mahmood, 120 Conn. App. 690, 694-95 , 992 A.2d 1219 (2010).

2010“The doctrine of equitable estoppel is well established. [WJhere one, by his words or actions, intentionally causes another to believe in the existence of a certain state of things, and thereby induces him to act on that belief, so as injuriously to affect his previous position, he is [precluded] from averring a different state of things as existing at the time.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Blackwell v. Mahmood, 120 Conn. App. 690, 694-95 , 992 A.2d 1219 (2010).

12010–2010
Johnnycake Mountain Associates v. Ochs green
conn · 2008
2 sentences

2010The doctrine of equitable estoppel is well established. “[W]here one, by his words or actions, intentionally *695 causes another to believe in the existence of a certain state of things, and thereby induces him to act on that belief, so as injuriously to affect his previous position, he is [precluded] from averring a different state of things as existing at the time.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Johnnycake Mountain Associates v. Ochs, 104 Conn. App. 194, 208 , 932 A.2d 472 (2007), cert. denied, 286 Conn. 906 , 944 A.2d 978 (2008); see also Cowles v. Bacon, 21 Conn. 451, 467 (1852).

2010The doctrine of equitable estoppel is well established. “[W]here one, by his words or actions, intentionally *695 causes another to believe in the existence of a certain state of things, and thereby induces him to act on that belief, so as injuriously to affect his previous position, he is [precluded] from averring a different state of things as existing at the time.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Johnnycake Mountain Associates v. Ochs, 104 Conn. App. 194, 208 , 932 A.2d 472 (2007), cert. denied, 286 Conn. 906 , 944 A.2d 978 (2008); see also Cowles v. Bacon, 21 Conn. 451, 467 (1852).

12010–2010
Canfield v. Gregory green
conn · 1895
2 sentences

2001In Canfield v. Gregory, 66 Conn. 9 , 33 A. 536 (1895), this court stated: “The modem estoppel in pais is of equitable origin, though of equal application in courts of law.

2001In Canfield v. Gregory, 66 Conn. 9 , 33 A. 536 (1895), this court stated: “The modem estoppel in pais is of equitable origin, though of equal application in courts of law.

12001–2001

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check