proprietary esstoppel a cause of action?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kwinkles

New Member
can proprietary estoppel be used as a cause of action in California? I only seem to find mention of it in reference to cases in canada or the UK
;
 
can proprietary estoppel be used as a cause of action in California? I only seem to find mention of it in reference to cases in canada or the UK
;

Here you go, Kwinkles, have yourself a look see:

http://thelawdictionary.org/proprietary-estoppel/

I don't think you mean cause of action, insomuch as a defense or a theory of your case.

Dependent upon your action, you might want to look at laches.
 
Promissory Estoppel!

KWINKLES…

That is because Proprietary Estoppel is not so much a practice of the U.S. Jurisprudence as it is a staple of English law, practiced similarly within the commonwealth countries, of which Canada is a member. While Proprietary Estoppel may not be found as a cause of action in California, there is however a parallel cause of action that is practiced routinely not only in California, but throughout the United States which is Promissory Estoppel.

And don't let the prefixes Proprietary and Promissory confuse you as the main point of concern here is Estoppel.

Estoppel is not a substantive rule of law but a doctrine rooted in equity and aimed at righting the wrong caused by some qausi contracts (not expressed, oral, verbal) whereby one party is unjustly enriched by making an illusory promise which brings about the other party's detriment in reliance of that promise. So while Proprietary Estoppel limits the underlying action to disputes over land rights and ownership, promissory Estoppel is used to put matters on equal footing in a variety of disputes where the Plaintiff was damaged by relying on a Promise made by the defendant.

So, yes; there is an equivalent of Proprietary Estoppel in California as a cause of action and that is Promissory Estoppel which is written like this:

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
For Unjust Enrichment (Promissory Estoppel)
Against all Defendants

fredrikklaw
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top