Colyer v. Vanderbilt Hotel Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtSeawell, J.
This case hinges mainly around the question whether there is any evidence tending to show that MacAllister had authority to make the contract sued upon in behalf of the Hotel Company. We conclude that there is.
The plaintiff had the right to deal with MacAllister according to the apparent scope of his authority. Powell v. Lumber Co., 168 N. C., 632, 485 S. E., 1032; Oliver v. Fidelity Co., 176 N. C., 598, 97 S. E., 490; Daniel v. R. R., 136 N. C., 517, 48 S. E., 816; Stewart v. Realty Co., 159 N. C., 230, 74 S. E., 736. Limitations on authority within that scope unknown to plaintiff would not…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Daniel v. RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Stewart v. Salisbury Realty & InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
- State Ex Rel. Oliver v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
- Hooper v. Merchants Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
- New York Life Insurance v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Investment Properties of Asheville, Inc. v. AllenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- Rowe v. Franklin CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
- Hogue v. CruzCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2018
- Investment Properties of Asheville, Inc. v. AllenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972