Real Property – Unjust Enrichment & Equitable Estoppel – Oral Agreement – Ambiguities — Improvements – Destruction by Fire (access required)

Barnes v. Johnson The parties had vague oral agreements that plaintiff could live in, improve, and buy defendant’s property and that the parties might sell the improved property and split the “profit”; these agreements were not specific enough to support the application of the equitable estoppel doctrine.

Enter your user name and password in the fields above to gain access to the subscriber content on this site.

Your subscription includes one set of login credentials for your exclusive use. Security features have been integrated on this site: If someone signs in with your credentials while you are logged in, the site will automatically close your ongoing login and you will lose access at that time.

To inquire about group subscriptions or an enterprise site license for your firm, contact Sian Taylor.

If you feel your login credentials are being used by a second party, contact customer service at 877-615-9536 for assistance in changing your password.

Already a paid subscriber but not registered for online access yet? For instructions on how to get premium web access, click here.

Forgot your password?

South Carolina Lawyers Weekly

Real Property – Unjust Enrichment & Equitable Estoppel – Oral Agreement – Ambiguities — Improvements – Destruction by Fire

Leave a Reply