Rosenbaum v. Gilliam
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court.— Eon. Wm. Zachritz, Judge. (1) The law of this State is, that the application of the principle of agency is the same whether the principal is a corporation or an individual, and that if an officer of a corporation is allowed to deal with a third person, the company is hound, even though the agent exceeds his authority. Madden v. Realty, 75 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court.— Eon. Wm. Zachritz, Judge. (1) The law of this State is, that the application of the principle of agency is the same whether the principal is a corporation or an individual, and that if an officer of a corporation is allowed to deal with a third person, the company is hound, even though the agent exceeds his authority. Madden v. Realty, 75 Mo. App. 358; Sparks v. Dispatch Co., 104 Mo. 531; Moore v. Causs, 113 Mo. 98. (2) It is clear that, the managing officers of the corporation have power to employ attorneys and counselors; if such officers transcend…
1Opinion of the CourtReyburn, J.
Plaintiff tendered to defendant as assignee for allowance against the estate of the Phoenix Battery Manufacturing Company, under section 342 of the Revised Statutes, a demand expressed as follows:
“New York, February 13, 1900.
“Phoenix Battery Mfg. Co.,
To William A. Rosenbaum, Dr.
Electrical Expert and Patent Solicitor.
177 Times Building.
1899.
Sept. 11. To services and disbursements made for you in preparing and filing applications for patents on chemical generator of electricity in Canada, England, France, Belguim, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Russia, Sweden, Norway, Italy, Denmark, Spain,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Moore v. H. Gaus & Sons Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1892
- Southgate v. Atlantic & Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
- Taussig v. St. Louis & Kirkwood RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1901
- Hess v. ClarkMissouri Court of Appeals · 1882
- Lungstrass v. German InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- James H. Forbes Tea & Coffee Co. v. Baltimore BankSupreme Court of Missouri · 1940
- Cameron v. Electric Household Stores, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1935
- Integrity Mining & Milling Co v. MooreMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908