PRINCIPAL AND AGENT - IMPUTING KNOWLEDGE OF AGENT TO HIS PRINCIPAL

Authors

Michigan Law Review, University of Michigan Law School

Abstract

Harriman, acting for himself, by fraudulent misrepresentation obtained some collateral from the plaintiff. He pledged these securities through a dummy corporation to the Harriman National Bank & Trust Co., of which he was president at that time, and over which he exercised considerable control. The loan was formally approved by the loan committee of the bank. Held, plaintiff could recover his collateral because the agent's knowledge of the fraud was imputed to the bank. Munroe v. Harriman, (C. C. A. 2d, 1936) 85 F. (2d) 493, affirming (D. C. N. Y. 1935) 16 F. Supp. 341.

Recommended Citation

Michigan Law Review, PRINCIPAL AND AGENT - IMPUTING KNOWLEDGE OF AGENT TO HIS PRINCIPAL, 35 Mich. L. Rev. 686 (1937).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol35/iss4/24