Fourth Circuit· 8/6/1996
Lowery v. Stovall
Citations
- 92 F.3d 219
- 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 19535
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- stating that party taking an inconsistent position must have \intentionally misled\ the court (citation omitted)
- analyzing specific statements during the plea to determine whether judicial estoppel applied
- “Because of the harsh results attendant with precluding a party from asserting a position that would normally be available to the party, judicial estoppel must be applied with caution.”
- discussing the elements of judicial estoppel
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Cited by
41 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- New Hampshire v. MaineSupreme Court· 2001-05-29· cited 3,343×
- Perry v. BlumFirst Circuit· 2010-10-01· cited 138×
- Minnieland Private Day School, Inc. v. Applied Underwriters Captive Risk Assurance Co.Fourth Circuit· 2017-08-11· cited 125×
- Hossaini v. Western Missouri Medical CenterEighth Circuit· 1998-04-06· cited 98×
- Federal Communications Commission v. Airadigm Communications, Inc.Seventh Circuit· 2010-08-04· cited 97×
- Johnson v. Lindon City Corp.Tenth Circuit· 2005-04-25· cited 95×
- Folio v. City of ClarksburgFourth Circuit· 1998-01-26· cited 55×
- Kamel Chaney-Snell v. Andrew YoungSixth Circuit· 2024-04-15· cited 50×
- Mirando v. United States Department of TreasurySixth Circuit· 2014-09-08· cited 46×
- International Union, United Mine Workers v. Marrowbone Development Co.Fourth Circuit· 2000-11-14· cited 31×
- Bradford v. WigginsTenth Circuit· 2008-02-20· cited 28×
- A & J CONST. CO., INC. v. WoodIdaho Supreme Court· 2005-06-21· cited 24×
- Sedlack v. Braswell Services Group, Inc.Fourth Circuit· 1998-01-12· cited 21×
- R.M.S. Titanic, Inc. v. the Wrecked & Abandoned VesselFourth Circuit· 2002-04-12· cited 19×
- 1000 Friends of Maryland v. BrownerFourth Circuit· 2001-09-11· cited 18×
- In Re Enron Corp. Securities, DerivativeS.D. Texas· 2005-08-01· cited 17×
- United States v. John FarrarFifth Circuit· 2017-11-29· cited 17×
- D'Ambrosio v. WolfSupreme Court of Virginia· 2018-02-22· cited 14×
- Temple Univ. Hosp., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.D.C. Circuit· 2019-07-09· cited 14×
- Buckley v. Airshield Corp.D. Maryland· 2000-10-13· cited 13×
Cites
18 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court· 1982-06-24· cited 22,846×
- Graham v. ConnorSupreme Court· 1989-05-15· cited 16,485×
- Tennessee v. GarnerSupreme Court· 1985-03-27· cited 4,272×
- William Edwards v. Aetna Life Insurance CompanySixth Circuit· 1982-10-18· cited 411×
- Grady Allen v. Zurich Insurance CompanyFourth Circuit· 1982-01-08· cited 309×
- Patriot Cinemas, Inc. v. General Cinema Corp.First Circuit· 1987-11-24· cited 247×
- Harold M. Reynolds v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueSixth Circuit· 1988-11-16· cited 240×
- Duplan Corporation v. Deering Milliken, Inc.D. South Carolina· 1974-12-19· cited 231×
- Norman Slattery v. Christopher RizzoFourth Circuit· 1991-07-25· cited 171×
- Lowery v. StovallFourth Circuit· 1996-08-06· cited 162×
- John S. Clark Company v. Faggert & Frieden, P.C.Fourth Circuit· 1995-09-18· cited 126×
- McLenagan v. KarnesFourth Circuit· 1994-06-30· cited 124×
- Lichon v. American Universal InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court· 1990-07-30· cited 116×
- Selected Risks Insurance v. DeanSupreme Court of Virginia· 1987-04-24· cited 104×
- Tenneco Chemicals, Inc. v. William T. Burnett & Co., Inc., and Reeves Brothers, Inc.Fourth Circuit· 1983-03-03· cited 56×
- Rainey v. ConerlyFourth Circuit· 1992-08-19· cited 48×
- Eichelberger v. AycockSupreme Court· 1994-06-13· cited 14×
- People v. GoestenkorsAppellate Court of Illinois· 1996-02-29· cited 12×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.