Evans v. Mohr
Illinois Supreme Court
Appeal from the Appellate Court for the Second District;—heard in that court on appeal from the Circuit Court of LaSalle county; the Hon. Dorrance Dibell, Judge, presiding. The opinion of the Appellate Court, by Cartwright, J., was as follows: “This was a suit by appellant, commenced by attachment against appellees, who reside in Germany, to recover the value of services alleged to have been rendered for appellees by appellant, as their attorney.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Appellate Court for the Second District;—heard in that court on appeal from the Circuit Court of LaSalle county; the Hon. Dorrance Dibell, Judge, presiding. The opinion of the Appellate Court, by Cartwright, J., was as follows: “This was a suit by appellant, commenced by attachment against appellees, who reside in Germany, to recover the value of services alleged to have been rendered for appellees by appellant, as their attorney. The case was tried by the court without a jury, and there was judgment for appellees for costs. “The facts, as developed on the trial, are…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Baker
It is insisted that the opinion of the Appellate Court fails to recognize the distinction between a general and special authority in an agent. Also, that both the circuit and Appellate Courts erred in holding that appellees were not estopped to deny their liability to appellant by the payment to Mayo & Widmer. The question is not as to the authority of Barnum, under his agency, to employ appellant, but of his power under that agency, viz., the power of attorney, and the contract between himself and appellees, entered into contemporaneously with it. and of which appellant had notice, to bind…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Porter v. ElizaldeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Funk v. MohrIllinois Supreme Court · 1900
- Emblem v. Bicksler, McLean & BennettSupreme Court of Colorado · 1905
- Funk v. MohrAppellate Court of Illinois · 1899
- Jones v. SpencerAppellate Court of Illinois · 1898