Harris v. San Diego Flume Co.

Citations

• 87 Cal. 526
• 25 P. 758
• 1891 Cal. LEXIS 1017

Syllabus

<p>Principal and Agent — Ostensible Authority. — To make a case o£ ostensible authority, the act giving color of authority to the supposed agent must be known to the person who dealt with him, and must induce a belief in the mind of such person that the authority exists. If he does not know of any facts giving color of authority to the supposed agent, hut relies wholly upon the statements of the latter as to the existence of his authority, he cannot recover, although facts existed which, had he known them, might have justified belief in the existence of the authority.</p> <p>Id. — Burden oe Proof. — The party maintaining that an ostensible authority existed must prove that he knew of the facts giving color of authority to the supposed agent. A mere surmise that he knew them is not sufficient.</p> <p>Principal and Agent — Implied Authority — Burden of Proof. — While an agent has implied authority to do everything necessary, or proper and usual, in the ordinary course of business, for effecting the purpose of his agency, the party maintaining the existence of the agency must make it appear that the thing done was necessary, or proper and usual, etc.</p> <p>Id. ■— Judicial Notice. — The court cannot know judicially that the employment of a high-priced broker is necessary, or proper and usual, in the ordinary course of business, to get a contractor to enter into a contract for building a flume.</p>