Chase v. Chapman

Citations

• 89 Kan. 196
• 131 P. 615

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Contract — Agency to Sell Real Estate — Not a “Power Coupled with an- Interest.” To constitute a power coupled with an interest there must be an interest in the thing itself, and not merely in the execution of the power. An agency or privilege to sell real property and receive all the proceeds above a certain sum as commission is not a power coupled with an interest; nor does an agreement on the part of a managing agent to be responsible to the principal for all general losses in the conduct of a business result in making him an agent with such an interest.</p> <p>2. - Mismanagement — Rescission of Contract — Accounting. A contract between plaintiffs, who were the owners of a flouring mill, and the defendant provided that the owners were to furnish money to repair the mill and capital to operate it until it could be sold; the defendant to have full management and control the property and business, and if he found a purchaser he was to have as his commissions all the proceeds of the sale above a specified sum. He was to be paid a fixed salary and agreed to become responsible for all general losses incurred in the operation of the mill, giving security to plaintiffs for that purpose, but was to have no interest in the - profits of the business. Held, that his relation to the property was not that of an agency “coupled with an interest,” nor was it beyond the power of equity to control; and that plaintiffs might maintain a suit before the expiration of the contract to compel an accounting and to rescind and annul the contract so far as the same authorized his employment, on the ground of his misconduct as manager.</p>