Lehigh Valley Railroad v. Mansel

Citations

• 67 Pa. Super. 149
• 1917 Pa. Super. LEXIS 361

Syllabus

<p>Principal and agent — Evidence of agency — Bills of lading.</p> <p>In an action by a railroad company to recover freight and charges under a bill of lading purporting- to have been signed by defendants through an agent named, and the defendants deny the agency and there is no offer by the plaintiff to show that the defendants gave the shipping orders, the trial judge cannot be convicted of error in refusing- to permit the plaintiff to show other and similar acts of the alleged agent, where there is no offer to show that such acts related to transactions within a reasonable period prior to the signing of the shipping orders offered, or to connect the proposed testimony with other evidence showing that the alleged agent had within a reasonable .time prior to the date of the orders been employed by the defendant, and had done similar work, or signed similar papers.</p> <p>Unless there is proof either that an agency is a general continuing agency to endure until revoked, or that the agent fills some character from which such a general agency may be presumed the fact that there has been a separate former agency for a different or even a similar purpose does not raise a presumption of agency as to any subsequent transaction.</p>