Burnham v. Ellis
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Ox EXCEPTIONS from Nisi Prius, HOWARD, J., presiding. TRESPASS, quare clausum fregit. The general issue was pleaded, and a brief statement filed, that the acts, (if any,) wore done under a license from the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Ox EXCEPTIONS from Nisi Prius, HOWARD, J., presiding. TRESPASS, quare clausum fregit. The general issue was pleaded, and a brief statement filed, that the acts, (if any,) wore done under a license from the plaintiff. Under this branch of the defence, after some evidence had been introduced to show that one Daniel Burnham, a brother of plaintiff, had acted for many years as the agent of the plaintiff, in regard to the described close, and still continued to act, and that plaintiff had never been on to the close, the defendant was permitted to prove, though objected to, that said Daniel Burnham…
1Opinion of the CourtAppletON, J.
—It was in evidence, that Daniel Burnham was the general agent of the plaintiffs, having the control and management of the township, upon which the trespass set forth in the declaration, is alleged to have been committed. The contracts of an agent within the limits of his authority, and his declarations while in the transaction of business confided to his charge, are as binding on his principal as if made by him.
In the case before us, the statements of the agent do not appear to- have been made by him while in the exercise of his delegated authority. They relate to the past, and must be…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Klotz v. ButlerMississippi Supreme Court · 1879