Skip to main content
· 10/30/1889

Bibb v. Bancroft

Citations

  • 3 Cal. Unrep. 151
  • 22 P. 484

Syllabus

<p>Agency—Instructions.—In an Action for Breach of a Contract by which plaintiff was to remove debris for defendant, the evidence showed that plaintiff, when seeking the contract, was referred by defendant to' one C., and was told that anything he would do with him would be all right. On the question of agency, the court instructed as to the law of ostensible agency. Held, that the instruction was not irrelevant on the ground that an express agency only was shown by the evidence.</p> <p>Agency—Evidence.—The Complaint Stated That “The Parties hereto entered into a contract,” etc., and that “defendant agreed with said plaintiffs to pay them the prices stated,” etc. Held, that evidence of either an express or ostensible agency in the person who made the contract with plaintiffs was admissible.</p>

Judges: Paterson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.