Harrison v. Van Gunten

Citations

• 15 Pa. Super. 491
• 1901 Pa. Super. LEXIS 378

Syllabus

<p>Principal and agent — Employment of subagent — Negligence.</p> <p>Where an agent has authority to employ subagents, he will not be liable for their acts or omissions, unless in their appointment he is guilty of fraud or gross negligence or improperly co-operates in the acts or omissions.</p> <p>Whilst negligence is ordinarily a question for the jury, yet the question as to whether there is such evidence of negligence as should be submitted to the jury, is for the court.</p> <p>In an action by a tenant of a house against the agent of the owner of the house to recover damages for a loss occasioned by an improper and tortious distress, the case should not be submitted to the jury where the uncontradicted evidence shows that at a time when the tenant was in arrears for rent, a canvasser of a constable came to defendant and handed him a business card of his employer and produced a printed distress warrant with the constable’s name printed in the warrant; that the defendant, although not personally acquainted with the constable, knew of him, of his official business and of his business office; that without making any specific inquiry the defendant filled up the warrant of distress, and delivered it to the canvasser without any special instructions, and that the canvasser instead of delivering the warrant to the constable made the distress himself, and did it in a tortious and improper manner.</p>