Legal Opinion

Carstens Packing Co. v. Gross

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided January 21, 1930PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCoshow, C. J.

The existence of the agency is not disputed. Plaintiff admits that Schaeffer, who sold its merchandise to defendant and collected therefor, was its agent. The question is, what was the extent of the agent’s authority?

Proof of the authority of the agent may be made by the course of dealing between the parties. It is not necessary for the latter to prove that the principal conferred, either in writing or orally, specific authority, if the conduct ■ of the agent is within the scope of his authority as disclosed by the conduct of the parties. One dealing with a corporation must deal with its…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Nicholas v. Title & Trust Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Thomas v. Smith-Wagoner Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1925
  3. Leonard v. KingOregon Supreme Court · 1929

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Howland v. Iron Fireman Manufacturing Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Howland v. Iron Fireman Mfg. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Burke MacHinery Co. v. CopenhagenOregon Supreme Court · 1931
  4. John I. Haas, Inc. v. State Tax CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1961
  5. Real Estate Loan Fund Oreg. Ltd. v. HevnerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1985

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

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

Powered by the Exa API