In Sinclair, the court explained that equitable estoppel operates to prevent the denial of the existence of a contract, and promissory estoppel creates a contract that otherwise would not exist.
Summary of this case from Craig-Buff Limited Partnership v. U.S.No. 03-5344.
October 6, 2003.
C.A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 60 Fed. Appx. 499.
In Sinclair, the court explained that equitable estoppel operates to prevent the denial of the existence of a contract, and promissory estoppel creates a contract that otherwise would not exist.
Summary of this case from Craig-Buff Limited Partnership v. U.S.Full title:SINCLAIR v. UNITED STATES
Court:U.S.
Date published: Oct 6, 2003
A claim for promissory estoppel falls outside of scope of the Tucker Act, which provides the Court of Federal…
Strickland v. U.S.Since Janowsky, several cases have considered institutional ratification. See, e.g., Doe, 58 Fed. Cl. at 486;…