BASKIN

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (20 total)

• Fredrick v. United States, 163 F.2d 536 (9th Cir. 1947)
  …thus made. Hansen v. Boyd, 161 U.S. 397, 402, 403, 16 S.Ct. 571, 40 L.Ed. 746; Bank of Italy v. F. Romeo & Co., 9 Cir., 287 F. 5, 7; Milleson v. United States, 8 Cir., 78 F. 2d 60; Nailling v. United States, 6 Cir., 124 F. 2d 431, certiorari denied, 316 U.S. 675, 62 S.Ct. 1043, 86 L.Ed. 1749, petitions for rehearing denied, 316 U.S. 710, 711, 62 S.Ct. 1267, 86 L.Ed. 1776, petition for rehearing denied, 6 Cir., 142 F. 2d 551; Minnehaha County, S. D. v. Kelley, 8 Cir., 150 F. 2d 356, 359, 360. Despite this d…
• Advanced Hydraulics, Inc. v. Otis Elevator Co., 525 F.2d 477 (7th Cir. 1975)
  …gainst RCA on the same patent, but the Motorola result was based neither on such notice nor on the existence of the RCA suit. As Judge Cummings specifically held: In Lebold v. Inland Steel Co., 125 F. 2d 369, 375 (7th Cir. 1941), certiorari denied, 316 U.S. 675, 62 S.Ct. 1045, 86 L.Ed. 1749, Judge Lindley thoroughly explored the estoppel doctrine. As noted there, “Estoppel arises only when one has so acted as to mislead another and the one thus misled has relied upon the action of the inducing party to his…
• Saverslak v. Davis-Cleaver Produce Co., 606 F.2d 208 (7th Cir. 1979)
  …ises only when a party’s conduct misleads another to believe that a right will not be enforced and causes him to act to his detriment in reliance upon this belief. Id. (quoting Lebold v. Inland Steel Co., 125 F. 2d 369, 375 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 316 U.S. 675, 62 S.Ct. 1045, 86 L.Ed. 1749 (1941)); see 5 Williston on Contracts § 691 (3d ed. 1961 & Supp.1979). Even if the obligor has not waived a known right, he may be estopped from enforcing it.10 [*214] In light of the preceding distinction, we hold that…