About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

Case Citations [1] (July 2018 through April 2019)

handle is hein.ali/relagcy0131 and id is 1 raw text is: 





                                        AGENCY



                           CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTORY MATTERS

                                    TOPIC 1. DEFINITIONS

  § 2. Master; Servant; Independent Contractor

  Ohio App.2017. Quot. in case quot. in disc. Grocery-story customer brought a negligence action against
  grocery store and delivery man, alleging that she was struck in the back and knocked down by delivery
  man who was a store employee pushing a shopping cart piled high with boxes that he was delivering to
  the store, seeking damages for past and future medical expenses and noneconomic damages. The trial
  court granted defendants' motion for summary judgment. This court reversed and remanded, holding
  that there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether delivery man was an employee or an
  independent contractor of store. The court quoted a Supreme Court of Ohio case that cited Restatement
  of Agency § 2 in explaining that the control over the manner and means of the work performed was an
  important factor in determining if a person was an employee or an independent contractor. Boyland v.
  Giant Eagle, 96 N.E.3d 999, 1007.



                   CHAPTER 11. LIABILITY OF AGENT TO THIRD PERSON

                         TOPIC 1. CONTRACTS AND CONVEYANCES

                         TITLE A. AGENT A PARTY TO CONTRACT

  § 320. Principal Disclosed

  S.D.Tex.2017. Quot. in sup. Purported assignee of a deed of trust securing a home-equity loan on
  borrowers' home sued borrowers, seeking to foreclose under the deed of trust. On remand, the trial court
  ruled in favor of borrowers, finding that the purported assignment was void and invalid, because the
  entity that executed the assignment was acting solely as agent for a principal-the original lender-that
  had been dissolved and no longer existed. The court pointed out that, under Texas law and Restatement
  of Agency § 320, a person making or purporting to make a contract with another as agent for a disclosed
  principal did not become a party to the contract; thus, the entity was not a party to the assignment and its
  right to foreclose under the deed of trust was not validly transferred under the assignment. Deutsche
  Bank Nat'l Trust Co. v. Burke, 286 F.Supp.3d 802, 813.

  § 323. Integrated Contracts

  S.D.Tex.2017. Cit. in sup.; subsec. (1) cit. in sup. Purported assignee of a deed of trust securing a home-
  equity loan on borrowers' home sued borrowers, seeking to foreclose under the deed of trust. On
  remand, the trial court ruled in favor of borrowers, finding that the purported assignment was void and
  invalid, because the entity that executed the assignment was acting solely as agent for a principal-the
  original lender-that had been dissolved and no longer existed. The court pointed out that, under Texas
                              COPYRIGHT 02019 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE
                                           All rights reserved
                                     Printed in the United States of America
A .LI       For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most