Area v. Milliken
Supreme Court of Louisiana
* PPEAL from tlie Civil District Court, for the Parish of Orleans. -Cl. Houston, J. 1. A party who has been in the practice of insuring for another is presumed to have had proper authority, and cannot afterward omit doing so without informing the other 5 ho will otherwise be liable himself. 6 M. 649; 6 La. 583; 2 ft. 103; 73 HI. 404; Domat 1, 15, Sec. 4, Art. 4. 2. The attorney is responsible, not only for unfaithfulness in his management but also for his fault or neglect.
Read the full summary
* PPEAL from tlie Civil District Court, for the Parish of Orleans. -Cl. Houston, J. 1. A party who has been in the practice of insuring for another is presumed to have had proper authority, and cannot afterward omit doing so without informing the other 5 ho will otherwise be liable himself. 6 M. 649; 6 La. 583; 2 ft. 103; 73 HI. 404; Domat 1, 15, Sec. 4, Art. 4. 2. The attorney is responsible, not only for unfaithfulness in his management but also for his fault or neglect. It. C. C. 3003. 1. The plaintiffs sue on a “ verbal agreement” to insure the sugar in question consigned to defendant.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Manning, J.
The suit is for the value of fifteen hogsheads of sugar, alleged to be twelve hundred dollars, lost by the sinking of the Steamer Exchange in the Atchafalaya River on January 3, 1882. The defendant was the factor Of the plaintiffs, who reside at Abbeville. Their business relations commenced in 1879.
The plaintiffs had never instructed the defendant to insure their shipments. No instructions whatever were given concerning this shipment, and no insurance was effected.
There were two routes, or rather three, from Abbeville to-New Orleans. Two…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Strong v. HighSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1842
- Berthoud v. Gordon, Forstall, & Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1834
3Cited by1 opinion
- Broussard v. South Texas Rice CompanyTexas Supreme Court · 1910