Porter v. Merrill
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. John W. Henry, Judge. (1) Defendant is liable, having acted in his own name without disclosing his principal, and having expressly pledged his own credit for the performance of the promise contained in the declaration of trust. 1 Am. and Eng. Ency. Law, 402, 403, and cases cited. (2) Defendant certainly invested the money of Mrs. Smith.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. John W. Henry, Judge. (1) Defendant is liable, having acted in his own name without disclosing his principal, and having expressly pledged his own credit for the performance of the promise contained in the declaration of trust. 1 Am. and Eng. Ency. Law, 402, 403, and cases cited. (2) Defendant certainly invested the money of Mrs. Smith. It is equally certain that he did not say or intimate any such thing to Moore, or Oliphant, or plaintiff, until after the suit was filed. He kept the declaration which said he was the owner of a tenth. He treated with…
1Opinion of the CourtBurgess, J.
This case grew out of the same, transaction as did the preceding case of Porter et al. v. Woods, decided at the present term, and reported in this volume at page 539, and the facts are very much the same, the only substantial difference being in the amount involved, and in this case the defendant' claims to have been acting throughout the entire transaction as the agent of one Mrs. Augusta S. Smith, with the knowledge of W. S. Woods of the firm of Woods, Mellier &Co., and Robert N. Oliphant, who took the title, and executed the declaration of trust sued upon. He disclaims any interest in the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Cobb v. . KnappNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Hamlin v. AbellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- McClellan v. ParkerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1858
3Cited by2 opinions
- Lange v. BakerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1964
- Leckie v. RothenbargerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1900