Singer Manufacturing Co. v. Holdfodt

Citations

• 86 Ill. 455

Syllabus

<p>1. Exemplaby damages—when proper against Corporation. A corporation may be liable to vindictive damages for tbe wrongful act of its agent, perpetrated while ostensibly discharging duties within the scope of the corporate purposes.</p> <p>2. Same—in the particular case. W here a sewing machine was sold, to be paid for in monthly installments, and a lease given and accepted providing that the vendor might without process enter and take possession of the machine for the non-payment of any installment, and the purchaser made all his payments to the agent selling the same, and afterwards the vendor, by other agents, entered the purchaser’s house in his absence, and with force and violence removed the machine against the remonstrances of his wife, and kept the same for one day, when the same was returned, the party so taking claiming that it was done under the belief that full payment had not been made, but the evidence showing notice of the facts to the vendor’s agems, it was held, that the case was one eminently proper for the imposition of exemplary damages.</p> <p>3. Any unauthorized entry into a dwelling-house, or violent or grossly offensive conduct therein by a stranger, is deserving of prompt and adequate punishment. In such a case $500 damages is not excessive.</p> <p>4. Agency—of corporation, when presumed. A person openly and notoriously exercising the functions of a particular agency of a corporation will be presumed to have sufficient authority from the corporation to so act.</p> <p>5. Same—notice to agent is same as to principal. Knowledge of the facts in a matter by an agent transacting the business, and his acts, are the knowledge and the acts of his principal.</p>