Loeb v. Selig & Cromwell
Citations
- 120 La. 192
- 45 So. 100
- 1907 La. LEXIS 632
Syllabus
<p>1. Principal and Agent — Sales to Agent— Bbeach mr Trust.</p> <p>A person may sell to an agent personally who has no knowledge to put him on his guard of the agent’s breach of trust to his employer and principal in buying in his own name.</p> <p>2. Same — Payments—Recovery.</p> <p>The first sale was legal as between vendor and vendee, although the latter paid with money of his principal. The second sale was made by the agents, through the instrumentality of defendants. The cotton was sold to plaintiff in accordance with the directions of the agents. The agents to show their right as owners produced a bill of lading which they still held for the property.</p> <p>Upon representations of the agents and the bill of lading they held, defendants, in accordance with the agent’s advice, drew on them. Part of the amount was applied to payment of a debt due to them by the agents, and the remainder was paid by the agents.</p> <p>As to payment of the debt with the property of another, a discharged obligation by the payment of money or the delivery of some of those things which are consumed in the use, and the creditor has used them, in such a case neither the money nor the things can be reclaimed and the payment will be good. Giv. Code, art. 2138.</p> <p>As relates to payment of. remainder in cash, the agents of plaintiff, as well as plaintiff, cannot be the cause of defendants losing the sum paid by them in good faith upon the bill of lading produced.</p> <p>Provosty, J., dissenting.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting that a delay in the calculation of commissions as to which all contingencies were satisfied before the plaintiff’s employment was terminated did not take the commissions outside the scope of the Wage Act
- finding personal jurisdiction over defendant-CEO where he was a primary participant in corporate activities and transacted business within the state
- granting defendant’s motion to dismiss in part and permitting plaintiff’s Wage Act claims to go forward only insofar as plaintiff sought recovery for earned commissions on sales he made prior to the termination of his employment
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Breaux, Provosty
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.