Legal Opinion

Nesbitt v. Helser

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided February 15, 1872PublishedCited by 13 opinions

Appeal from Buchanan Circuit Court. The agency created by the contract sued on was a special as contradistinguished from a general agency, and its directions must have been strictly pursued in order to hold the principal liable under the contract. And it makes no difference that the attempted departure from those instructions by the agent was for the'interest and benefit of the principal. Every man has a right to decide for himself how his own business shall be conducted.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Buchanan Circuit Court. The agency created by the contract sued on was a special as contradistinguished from a general agency, and its directions must have been strictly pursued in order to hold the principal liable under the contract. And it makes no difference that the attempted departure from those instructions by the agent was for the'interest and benefit of the principal. Every man has a right to decide for himself how his own business shall be conducted. (Tate v. Evans, 7 Mo. 419 ; Sto. Eq., §§ 126-7 et seq. ; Mechanics’ Bank v. Schaumberg et al., 38 Mo. 28; Pars. Cont. 59.)…

1Opinion of the CourtWagner, Judge

The defendant owned a piece of land in Buchanan county and employed the plaintiff to sell the same, agreeing to give him all that he would obtain over the sum of $1,800 ; the sale to he made on a credit of one, two and three years, payments in equal annual installments, with six per cent, interest. Plaintiff sold the land, but on different and better terms ; that is, the purchaser agreed to pay $2,000 for it, $1,000 in cash and the balance in two equal payments at six and twelve months, with ten per cent, interest. It is alleged that these terms were transmitted to the defendant, and that he…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bailey v. ChapmanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1867
  2. Woods v. StephensSupreme Court of Missouri · 1870

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Gilder v. . DavisNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
  2. Love v. OwensMissouri Court of Appeals · 1888
  3. Hayden v. GrilloMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887
  4. Brown v. SmithMissouri Court of Appeals · 1905
  5. Christensen v. WooleyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API