AGENCY-LIABILITY OF AGENT ON CONTRACT FOR PRINCIPAL-EFFECT OF ADDING "AGENT" TO SIGNATURE

Authors

John A. Huston, University of Michigan Law SchoolFollow

Abstract

Defendant, a real estate broker purporting to act for X, made a contract with plaintiff for the sale to plaintiff of X's farm. The only evidence in the writing of defendant's agency was the word "agent" which he appended to his signature. Plaintiff paid defendant $1000.00 as a deposit which defendant tendered to X who returned $500.00 to defendant as his commission for the sale. Upon destruction of an important part of the premises before execution of the contract, plaintiff brought suit against X and defendant to rescind the contract and recover the deposit. Recovery against X was limited to $500.00 which X had already returned before suit, and the bill was dismissed as to defendant. Upon plaintiff's appeal, Held: defendant was liable in the sum of $500.00 as a party to the contract, the word "agent" being sufficient neither to indicate that he acted solely in a representative capacity nor to raise an ambiguity as to parties. Bissonnette v. Keyes, (Mass. 1946) 64 N.E. (2d) 926.

Recommended Citation

John A. Huston, AGENCY-LIABILITY OF AGENT ON CONTRACT FOR PRINCIPAL-EFFECT OF ADDING "AGENT" TO SIGNATURE, 45 Mich. L. Rev. 206 (1946).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol45/iss2/8