Belt v. Washington Water Power Co.

Citations

• 24 Wash. 387
• 64 P. 525
• 1901 Wash. LEXIS 544

Syllabus

<p>PRINCIPAL AND AGENT — -UNDISCLOSED PRINCIPAL-PLEADING.</p> <p>In an action against an undisclosed principal the complaint is not demurrable on the ground that it nowhere alleges that the agent was acting for an undisclosed principal, when in one paragraph it sets up the contract with the agent upon which the action is based, and in a subsequent paragraph alleges that the contract was executed by such agent for and on behalf of the defendant; that the agreements therein contained to be performed by said agent were in fact to be done by the defendant; that the defendant had repeatedly recognized the contract as binding upon it, and had repeatedly promised to carry out the terms thereof.</p> <p>SAME-WRITTEN AGREEMENT BY AGENT-PAROL EVIDENCE.</p> <p>Oral testimony is admissible for the purpose of showing that an undisclosed principal was actually a party to a written agreement.</p> <p>SAME-ACTION AGAINST PRINCIPAL AND AGENT JOINTLY-MISJOINDER.</p> <p>Conceding that a joint action against an alleged agent and his undisclosed principal may be a misjoinder of causes of action, yet where the alleged agent was dismissed from the case in response to a demurrer, and the action proceeded against the alleged principal alone, with the acquiescence of plaintiff, the error, if any, was cured by the action of the court and parties.</p> <p>BREACH OF CONTRACT-MEASURE OF DAMAGES.</p> <p>In an action to recover damages for breach of contract to construct and operate an electric railway, an allegation that plaintiff was the owner of a large amount of real estate, laid off into lots and blocks, and suitable only for suburban residences, that, as defendant well knew, his purpose in entering into the contract was to increase their value and make them available as city property; and that the difference in value between such property with and without said extension was $25,000, is a sufficient allegation of the measure of damages to which plaintiff is entitled, since the proper measure of