Opinion · Supreme Court of Kansas

St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad v. Daugherty

72 Kan. 678

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of Kansas
Jurisdiction
Kansas
Date
1905-12-09
Topic
general

Per Curiam,: In this case the testimony of the attorney for the plaintiff was doubtless sufficient, even though it was very slight, to show that W. B. Spaulding was the general claim agent, and J. L. Gaston the assistant claim agent, of the defendant.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad v. Daugherty. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
3 opinions
Per Curiam,:

In this case the testimony of the attorney for the plaintiff was doubtless sufficient, even though it was very slight, to show that W. B. Spaulding was the general claim agent, and J. L. Gaston the assistant claim agent, of the defendant. The scope of the authority of the claim agent and assistant claim agent of a railway corporation is not, however, defined by the law, and if put in issue must be proved as a matter of fact. Here the authority of the officials named to make the settlement relied upon as the plaintiff’s cause of action was denied under oath, and there is no evidence of such authority in the record. It is true that the conduct of the officials named may appear to be inexplicable except upon the supposition that they had authority. Agency, however, cannot be proved by the acts or declaration of the agent except under special contingencies not here involved. The fact of authority must appear before the conduct of the agent can be shown to bind the principal. This being true, the judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded for a new trial.