San Antonio v. Lewis
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Bexar. This suit was brought by the appellee to recover oí tlie appellant. 8511.57, the. amount of an account for printing clone by the former for the latter, pursuant to a contract between the parties.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Bexar. This suit was brought by the appellee to recover oí tlie appellant. 8511.57, the. amount of an account for printing clone by the former for the latter, pursuant to a contract between the parties. Tho defendant denied that the work was done under the contract, and averred that it was worth no more than thirty-two dollars. 'I'iie contract was evidenced by the following proposition, accepted by the city by its Mayor acting under the authority of tlie Board of Aldermen “ San Antonio, July 5th, 1830. “The undersigned propose to do the city printing at one cent for eacli ten…
1Opinion of the CourtWheelek, J.
It seems to he the well-settled doctrine that all parol contracts made by the authorized agents of a corporation within the scope of the legitimate purposes of its institution are express promises of the corporation ; and all duties imposed on them by law and all benefits conferred at their request raise implied promises, for the enforcement of which an action will lie. (7 Cr. R., 299; 2 Cond. R., 501; 14 Johns. R., 118.)
NoteIG. — Swift». Herrera, post 2G3; Wright «.Thompson, 14 T., 663; Beach v. Ryan, 40 T.,399.
Tliis doctrine is not now questioned; lint tlie instruction now objected to is…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Middlesex Turnpike Corp. v. SwanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
3Cited by21 opinions
- Overton v. BlumTexas Supreme Court · 1878
- City of Davenport v. Peoria Marine & Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
- City of Houston v. Howe & WiseCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1959
- Township of Taymouth v. KoehlerMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
- Fleming v. ToddCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1931
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.