1 / 8

Agency & Partnership Professor Donald J. Kochan

Agency & Partnership Professor Donald J. Kochan. Class 4. Today’s Readings. Pages 23-44 The Agency Relationship Agency Distinguished from Other Relationships. Hunter Mining Laboratories, Inc. v. Management Assistance, Inc. Distinction Between AGENCY and CONTRACT Authority Issues

monita
Télécharger la présentation

Agency & Partnership Professor Donald J. Kochan

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Agency & PartnershipProfessor Donald J. Kochan Class 4

  2. Today’s Readings • Pages 23-44 • The Agency Relationship • Agency Distinguished fromOther Relationships

  3. Hunter Mining Laboratories, Inc. v. Management Assistance, Inc. • Distinction Between AGENCY and CONTRACT • Authority Issues • Control and Evidence Necessary to Satisfying Definition of Acting “On Behalf Of” • Focus on Court’s Requirement for Control and Evidence of Fiduciary Relationship • Distinction from Seller/Buyer – see also Note on Stansifer • Assignment/Subagency Issues

  4. United States v. General Electric Co. • Distribution and Price Fixing Case • Is GE responsible for acts of its distributors? • Brokers Issues • Test: “. . . whether the actor is acting primarily for his own benefit or for the benefit of the other party when acting pursuant to the arrangement between the parties.”

  5. A. Gay Jensen Farms Co. v. Cargill Inc. • Default on Contracts for Sale of Grain Case/Financing Agreement Case • Consent – Implied or Express Must Exist • Issue: Under facts, was an agency relationship established? • “. . . an agreement may result in the creation of an agency relationship although the parties did not call it an agency and did not intend the legal consequences of the relationship to follow. The existence of the agency may be proved by circumstantial evidence which shows a course of dealing between the two parties . . .”

  6. Jones v. Taylor • What is the difference between bailment and agency? • Control v. Exclusivity of Possession over cab – ownership and dominion issues

  7. Dierksen v. Albert • Trustees v. Agents – Pay Particular Attention to the Distinctions in the Notes Following the Case • Fiduciary Duties – A fiduciary is “a person having a duty, created by his undertaking, to act primarily for the benefit of another in matters connected with his undertaking.” • From the text (emphasis added):“[A]lthough a trustee acts on behalf of its beneficiary, usually a trustee is not subject to the beneficiary’s control. Thus an agency relationship does not ordinarily exist between trustee and beneficiary. This also true of guardians, executors and receivers, who act on behalf of persons but are not subject to their control and thus are not agents.”

  8. Concluding Remarks • Be able to distinguish between different types of legal relationships and the consequences of the distinction • Be able to understand when and why the characterization of the relationship makes a difference

More Related