Shull v. New Birdsall Co.
South Dakota Supreme Court
Appeal from circiut court, Codington county. Hon. A. W. Campbell, Judge. Action by Robert Shull against the New Birdsall Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, and from an order denying a new trial, defendant appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion. A well established rule of law is: “Agencies cannot be established by the admission or statements of an agent.” This rule is abundantly sustained by various courts, and especially by the courts of North and South Dakota.
Read the full summary
Appeal from circiut court, Codington county. Hon. A. W. Campbell, Judge. Action by Robert Shull against the New Birdsall Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, and from an order denying a new trial, defendant appeals. The facts are stated in the opinion. A well established rule of law is: “Agencies cannot be established by the admission or statements of an agent.” This rule is abundantly sustained by various courts, and especially by the courts of North and South Dakota. Gorden v. Vt. Loan and Trust Co., 71 N. W. 556; Plano Co., v. Root, 54 N. W. 924; Loverin Brown Co. 1. Bank of Buffalo, 75…
1Opinion of the CourtCorson, J.
This was an action by the plaintiff to recover of the defendant the value of a second hand threshing rig claimed to have been delivered by the plaintiff to the defendant, and damages for the failure to deliver a new rig ordered by the plaintiff. Verdict was directed for the plaintiff, and the defendant appeals.
The defendant is a corporation doing business at Auburn, in the state of New York. The plaintiff is a resident of Codington county, in this state. On the 25th of July, 1898, the plaintiff ordered from the defendant, through its agent in the city of Watertown, (Hess & Rau) one Birdsall…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hurley v. WatsonMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- McKindly v. DunhamWisconsin Supreme Court · 1882
- Dodge v. McDonnellWisconsin Supreme Court · 1861
- Moyle v. Congregational Society of Salt Lake CityUtah Supreme Court · 1897
- Ætna Insurance v. North-Western Iron Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1867
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- J. I. Case Threshing Machine Co. v. EichingerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1902
- Quale v. HazelSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1905
- Westby v. J. I. Case Threshing Machine Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1911
- Reeves & Co. v. LewisSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1910
- Wilson v. City of MitchellSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1903
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.