Legal Opinion

Lucas v. Cella

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided November 28, 1905PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Jesse A. McDonald, Judge. An agent who acts for both parties to a contract in bringing it about cannot recover any compensation from either unless both consent to his double agency. A fortiori where the double agency is known to one principal and unknown to the other, the agent cannot recover from that principal who has no knowledge of and does not consent to the dual relation. Chapman v. Curie, 51 Mo.

Read the full summary

Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Jesse A. McDonald, Judge. An agent who acts for both parties to a contract in bringing it about cannot recover any compensation from either unless both consent to his double agency. A fortiori where the double agency is known to one principal and unknown to the other, the agent cannot recover from that principal who has no knowledge of and does not consent to the dual relation. Chapman v. Curie, 51 Mo. App. 40; McClure v. Ullmann, 102 M’o. App. 697; 77 S. W. 325; Smith v. Tyler, 57 Mo. 668; DeSteiger v. Hollington, 17 Mo. App. 382; Harkness v.…

1Opinion of the CourtBland, P. J.

— The suit is upon the following account, which was filed as an exhibit with the first count of the petition- — the count on which the case was tried and submitted to the jury:

“Louis A. Celia, to Joseph H. Lucas, Dr.
“For services rendered between, on or about the first day of August, 1902, and on or about the first day of March, 1903, as consulting engineer in forming and drawing plans and specifications, and making estimates and procuring and making contracts for the erection of a steam heating plant, engines, boilers, generators, steam separators, steam heaters and fire extinguisher, in…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. City of St. Louis v. Annex Realty Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1903
  2. Terti v. American InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1898
  3. Wilson v. Standard Operating Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1902

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Ridenour v. Wilcox Mines Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1912
  2. Coleman v. FletcherMissouri Court of Appeals · 1945
  3. Bridewell v. CockrellMissouri Court of Appeals · 1906

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

Powered by the Exa API