Pettit-Galloway Company v. Womack
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Hart, J.,
(after stating the facts). The view we have reached renders it unnecessary to decide whether or not the change from the overhead to the up-feed system was a material one, for the reason that we are of the opinion that, under the facts and attending circumstance, the doctrine of equitable estoppel applies, and the defendant has waived the right to have the overhead system of heating installed.
In 'discussing the doctrine of equitable estoppel, Professor Pomeroy says that acquiescence consisting of mere silence may also operate as a true estoppel in equity to preclude a party from…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Boston Store v. SchleuterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
- Hot Springs Ry. Co. v. MaherSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1886
- Carlile v. CorriganSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
- Brownfield v. BookoutSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1921
- Hatfield Special School District v. KnightSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1914
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Nelson v. Chicago Mill & Lumber CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1935
- Merchants' & Planters' Bank v. Citizens' BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
- Schoenfeld v. PuyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1933
- Baker-Matthews Lumber Company v. Bank of LepantoSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926
- Griffin v. SolomonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1962
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.