PJC Business

PJC 101.22

C ONTRACTS

PJC 101.22 Defenses—Instruction on Equitable Estoppel Failure to comply by Don Davis is excused if the following circumstances occurred: 1. Paul Payne a. by words or conduct made a false representation or concealed material facts, and b. with knowledge of the facts or with knowledge or information that would lead a reasonable person to discover the facts, and c. with the intention that Don Davis would rely on the false rep resentation or concealment in acting or deciding not to act; and 2. Don Davis a. did not know and had no means of knowing the real facts and b. relied to his detriment on the false representation or conceal ment of material facts. COMMENT When to use. PJC 101.22 submits the affirmative defense of equitable estoppel. Source of definition. The elements of estoppel are adapted from Schroeder v. Texas Iron Works, Inc. , 813 S.W.2d 483, 489 (Tex. 1991), overruled on other grounds by In re United Services Automobile Ass’n , 307 S.W.3d 299 (Tex. 2010); Gulbenkian v. Penn , 252 S.W.2d 929, 932 (Tex. 1952). For a general discussion of equitable estop pel, see Barfield v. Howard M. Smith Co. of Amarillo , 426 S.W.2d 834 (Tex. 1968). Equitable estoppel distinguished from other types of estoppel. Equitable estoppel differs from other types of estoppel because it requires some deception prac ticed on a party who was misled to his injury. Bocanegra v. Aetna Life Insurance Co. , 605 S.W.2d 848, 851 (Tex. 1980). That party, however, must show his reliance on the representation. Shields Limited Partnership v. Bradberry , 526 S.W.3d 471, 486 (Tex. 2017). Estoppel based on silence. Estoppel may also be based on silence or inaction, rather than on affirmative misrepresentations, if one under a duty to speak or act has by his silence or inaction misled the opposing party to his detriment. Smith v. National Resort Communities, Inc. , 585 S.W.2d 655, 658 (Tex. 1979); Scott v. Vandor , 671 S.W.2d 79, 87 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1984, writ ref’d n.r.e.). If estoppel is based on something other than affirmative misrepresentations, a different instruction should be substituted for PJC 101.22.

78