TROTTI v. NEAMS

Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Report a problem

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

10541

Attorney(S)

Messrs. Efird Carroll, for appellant. No citations. Mr. W.W. Hawes, for respondent, cites: Notice of intention to appeal was too late: 77 S.C. 156. Exception too general: 100 S.C. 45. Allegation of fraud without charging injury is not sufficient: 78 S.C. 482. Where principal ratifies act of agent, third party cannot complain: 31 Cyc. 1290. After ratification, parties stand in same relation as if authority had been previously granted: 31 Cyc. 1283. No liability on agent acting without authority where ratification places third person in no worse position than he would have occupied had the agent acted under prior authority: 31 Cyc. 1285. And such agent is entitled to compensation: 31 Cyc. 1488. Effect of sale by unauthorized agent, afterwards confirmed: 37 S.C.L. (3 Rich.) 216.

Are you a practicing lawyer?

Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.

Upload pleading to use the new AI search

Click here to upload

Cites

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

10541

Attorney(S)

Messrs. Efird Carroll, for appellant. No citations. Mr. W.W. Hawes, for respondent, cites: Notice of intention to appeal was too late: 77 S.C. 156. Exception too general: 100 S.C. 45. Allegation of fraud without charging injury is not sufficient: 78 S.C. 482. Where principal ratifies act of agent, third party cannot complain: 31 Cyc. 1290. After ratification, parties stand in same relation as if authority had been previously granted: 31 Cyc. 1283. No liability on agent acting without authority where ratification places third person in no worse position than he would have occupied had the agent acted under prior authority: 31 Cyc. 1285. And such agent is entitled to compensation: 31 Cyc. 1488. Effect of sale by unauthorized agent, afterwards confirmed: 37 S.C.L. (3 Rich.) 216.

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

TROTTI v. NEAMS.

December 20, 1920. The opinion of the Court was delivered by

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE GARY.

For the reason assigned by his Honor, the Circuit Judge, in sustaining the demurrer, and the appellant having failed to satisfy this Court that he erroneously exercised his discretion in refusing to allow the defendant to amend his answer, the judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.

MESSRS. JUSTICES HYDRICK, WATTS and FRASER concur.

MR. JUSTICE GAGE did not take part on account of sickness.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

TROTTI v. NEAMS.

Comments