Huntley v. . Mathias
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Civil ActioN for damages for injury to a horse, tried at Spring Term, 1883, of ÁNSON Superior Court, before Jiae-Kae, J. It is alleged in the complaint that the defendant Mathias was the agent, and in the employ of, and doing business for, the defendant corporation (The Taylor Manufacturing Company), and that while he was so employed, on or about the 1st day of October, 1881, he, as such agent, hired from the plaintiff a horse, and did “ neglect, abuse, overdrive, overload,…
Read the full summary
Civil ActioN for damages for injury to a horse, tried at Spring Term, 1883, of ÁNSON Superior Court, before Jiae-Kae, J. It is alleged in the complaint that the defendant Mathias was the agent, and in the employ of, and doing business for, the defendant corporation (The Taylor Manufacturing Company), and that while he was so employed, on or about the 1st day of October, 1881, he, as such agent, hired from the plaintiff a horse, and did “ neglect, abuse, overdrive, overload, and greatly .damage” said horse. It is further alleged that the defendant corporation so hired the horse, and injured…
1Opinion of the CourtMerrimoN, J.
In the absence of any written instrument, agencies in many cases arise from verbal authorizations, from implications, from the nature of the business to be done, or from the general usages of trade and commerce.
It is a general principle, applicable in all such cases, whether the agency be general or special, unless the inference is expressly negatived by some fact or circumstance, that it includes the authority to employ all the usual modes and means of accomplishing the purposes and ends of the agency, and a slight deviation by the agent from the course of his duty will not vitiate his act,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Katzenstein v. Raleigh & Gaston RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1881
- Bentley v. DoggettWisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
- Planters' & Farmers' National Bank of Batimore v. First National Bank of WiilmingtonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1876
- Gilbraith & Co. v. L. Lineberger & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1873
- Williams v. . WindleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1882
3Cited by12 opinions
- St. Louis Gunning Advertising Co. v. Wanamaker & BrownMissouri Court of Appeals · 1905
- Tuttle v. Junior Building Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
- Haynor Manufacturing Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
- Unitype Co. v. . AshcraftSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
- Etheridge, Fulghum & Co. v. L. Hilliard & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1888
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.