Harris v. Simmerman

Citations

• 81 Ill. 413

Syllabus

<p>Payment—when agent authorized to receive. Where an agent for the sale of safes sold a new safe, and took an old one in part payment, which was reported to the principal, who accepted the old safe and sent the one sold to the purchaser, without any notice to him that the agent had transcended his authority, it was held, that the purchaser had a right to suppose that the agent was authorized to receive pay for the safe so sold hy him, and that payment hy the purchaser to such agent was good as against the principal, if made without any notice that the agent was not authorized to receive it.</p>