Elizabeth Webb v. Daniel Andrew Webb

Summary

The court reversed the appellate court and reinstated the trial court's ruling that the fraudulent loan was Daniel Webb's separate obligation and that he was not entitled to reimbursement from Elizabeth Webb or the former community. Applying judicial estoppel, the court held that Webb could not shift from representations of sole and full financial responsibility made during his disciplinary proceeding to a later position seeking shared responsibility. The court concluded that the prior representations were intentional, accepted by the court, inconsistent with the later position, and subject to equitable enforcement.