Barsumian v. Barsumian

3 Citing cases

  1. Pinnacle Port Community Ass'n, v. Orenstein

    872 F.2d 1536 (11th Cir. 1989)   Cited 39 times
    Holding that a joint venture can be inferred from the parties' conduct

    However, adoption requires less reliance than the forms of estoppel discussed above. While the doctrine is rooted in estoppel, see Gulf Cities, 253 So.2d at 748; Barsumian v. Barsumian, 235 So.2d 515, 517-18 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 1970), the majority of the cases make clear that the reliance requirement may be satisfied merely by the estopped party's having accepted the other party's compliance with the terms of the contract. See generally Billings v. City of Orlando, 287 So.2d 316, 318 (Fla. 1973); Ayala v. Murrell, 97 So.2d 13, 15 (Fla. 1957); Barsumian, 235 So.2d at 518.

  2. The Florida Bar v. McCain

    361 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 1978)   Cited 30 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding equitable estoppel in disciplinary proceeding requires inducement to change position

    Our case law is in accord. Coogler v. Rogers, 25 Fla. 853, 7 So. 391 (1889); Barsumian v. Barsumian, 235 So.2d 515 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970). Estoppel does not apply to the facts of this case.

  3. MacKay v. Florida Power Light Co.

    524 So. 2d 1068 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)   Cited 2 times

    . . . Equitable estoppel precludes a person from maintaining a position inconsistent with another position which is sought to be maintained at the same time or which was asserted at a previous time. In Barsumian v. Barsumian, 235 So.2d 515 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970), this court recognized the doctrine of equitable estoppel and defined it as follows: "Equitable estoppel" precludes a person from maintaining a position inconsistent with another position which is sought to be maintained at the same time or which was asserted at a previous time; and, as a general rule where a person has, with knowledge of the facts, acted or conducted himself in a particular manner, or asserted a particular claim or right, he cannot afterward assume a position inconsistent with such act or conduct to the prejudice of another who has acted in reliance on such conduct.