State v. Wallace’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Four elements are necessary to establish estoppel. They are: (1) the party to be estopped must know the facts; (2) the party to be estopped must intend that the conduct be acted on or must act so that the party asserting the estoppel had a right to believe it was so intended; (3) the party asserting the estoppel must be ignorant of the facts; and (4) the party asserting the estoppel must rely on the other’s conduct and be injured by that reliance. State v. Wallace, 328 Ark. 183 , 941 S.W.2d 430 (1997); Foote’s Dixie Dandy, Inc. v. McHenry, 270 Ark. 816 , 607 S.W.2d 323 (1980). Additionally, we have specifically held that a sovereign is not bound by the unauthorized acts of its employees. Arkansas State Highway Comm’n v. Townsend, 313 Ark. 702 , 858 S.W.2d 66 (1993); Miller v. City of Lake City, 302 Ark. 267 , 789 S.W.2d 440 (1990); Hankins v. City of Pine Bluff, 217 Ark. 226 , 229 S.W.2d 231 (1950). On appeal, we do not reverse a chancellor’s findings of fact unless they are clearly against the preponderance of the evidence. Thompson v. Potlatch Corp., 326 Ark. 244 , 930 S.W.2d 355 (1996).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 67 Ark. App. 98 - Duchac v. City of Hot Springs · All American Life Insurance v. Billingsley