AGENCY- LIABILITY OF PRINCIPAL FOR TORTS OF AGENT-APPARENT AUTHORITY

Authors

Abstract

Defendant regularly delivered goods to plaintiff C. O. D. Lambert was employed by defendant to deliver such goods and collect for them, and for this purpose he was given blank re6eipts which he was authorized to fill out and sign upon being paid for the goods. The usual course of business was for Lambert to deliver to plaintiff's shipping clerk who signed the delivery bill, and then collect from plaintiff's cashier who was stationed in another room. Plaintiff's cashier never asked to see this delivery bill, but always took Lambert's word as to the amount due. For a period of three and a half years Lambert made excessive collections and often charged for goods that were never received or sent by defendant. This money was kept by Lambert. The court found that Lambert knowingly and fraudulently made false representations as to the amount due, that plaintiff rightfully and in good faith relied on such representations, that Lambert was acting within the scope of his employment and within his apparent authority, and that plaintiff in no way negligently contributed to the damage. Held, defendant is liable to plaintiff for the excess amounts paid in pursuance to the false representations by Lambert that such amounts were payable. Ripon Knitting Works v. Railway Express Agency (Wis. 1932) 240 N. W. 840.

Recommended Citation

AGENCY- LIABILITY OF PRINCIPAL FOR TORTS OF AGENT-APPARENT AUTHORITY, 30 Mich. L. Rev. 1333 (1932).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol30/iss8/15