Legal Opinion

Ricard v. Pollard Auto Co.

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided January 2, 1934PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPeaslee, C. J.

The case against the company is to be decided upon the evidence of an agency as between principal and agent. There is no question of holding out or of apparent authority. It is only upon the theory that the agent was about his principal's business that liability of the principal could be found. The utmost that the evidence would justify as a finding of authority conferred is that Doherty had permission to let any one drive the car if he thought that party was a prospective purchaser. This does not mean authority to permit driving by such a party to an unlimited extent, but only such as the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Rochester Lumber Co. v. LockeSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1903
  2. Casey v. Frank Jones Brewing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1918
  3. Harris v. SmithSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1902
  4. Harrington v. TremblaySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1881

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Lavigne v. NelsonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1941
  2. Philips Bros. Electrical Contractors, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Turnpike CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2008

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

Powered by the Exa API