Legal Opinion

Gibson v. Bailey Co.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided October 17, 1905PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Dmiel D. Fisher, Judge. “An agent who has misconducted himself in the business of his agency, and who has engaged in illegal transactions, by which he acquired interests adverse to those of his principal, cannot, under a quantum meruit, claim compensation for his services.” Hobson v. Peake, 44 La. Ann. 383; I Am. and Eng.

Read the full summary

Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Dmiel D. Fisher, Judge. “An agent who has misconducted himself in the business of his agency, and who has engaged in illegal transactions, by which he acquired interests adverse to those of his principal, cannot, under a quantum meruit, claim compensation for his services.” Hobson v. Peake, 44 La. Ann. 383; I Am. and Eng. Ency. of Law, p. 397; Tiffany on Agency, p. 415, sec. 107; Mechem on Agency, p. 146, sec. 215; Huffcut on Agency (2 Ed.), p. 110, sec. 90. (1) Where the trial'court has the witnesses personally before it, and there is evidence…

1Opinion of the CourtBland, P. J.

The petition states the following cause of action:

“Plaintiff states that on or about the fifteenth day of August, 1903, said defendant, through its president, one R. A. Bailey, made a contract with plaintiff, by the *352terms of which he was to be paid by said defendant a commission of fifteen per cent on all goods sold by him in behalf of said defendant, one-half of said commission upon acceptance of order by defendant, and one-half when said goods were delivered to the purchaser thereof.
“That in pursuance of said contract and agreement, plaintiff on or about the fifteenth day of September,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Paul v. Minneapolis Threshing Machine Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1901
  2. State ex rel. Festor v. StaedSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
  3. Rice, Stix & Co. v. McClure & HarperMissouri Court of Appeals · 1898
  4. Bethune v. Cleveland, St. Louis & Kansas City Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1897
  5. Ellis v. Mississippi River & Bonne Terre RailwayMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Sommer v. BrysonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1913

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

Powered by the Exa API