Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Airline Support, Inc. v. ASM Capital II, L.P.

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided June 29, 2012No. Nos. S-13584, S-13593Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partStowers, Justice

I agree that there is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Airline Support's accounting manager, Katie Land, had apparent authority to execute ASM Capital's assignment agreement. The court concludes that a genuine issue of material fact arises from the third factor in our apparent authority analysis, namely, that on the state of the evidence it cannot be said as a matter of law that ASM acted reasonably in relying on the principal's (Airline Support's) manifestations to the third party (ASM) of the agent's (Katie Land's) authority to bind Airline Support to the assignment agreement.…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Anderson v. PPCT Management Systems, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API