About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (July 2019 - August 2020)

handle is hein.ali/rethrida0134 and id is 1 raw text is: AGENCY 3D Generally D.Md.2019. Cit. generally in sup. and in case quot. in sup. In an action by patrons against owner of an entertainment complex and its purported agents, who allegedly sent text messages to patrons using an automatic-telephone-dialing system in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), this court denied in part defendants' motion to dismiss, holding that a defendant could be vicariously liable for violations of the TCPA where a plaintiff established an agency relationship, and that, in this case, plaintiffs' allegations were sufficient to set forth an agency relationship between the defendants under the Restatement Third of Agency. The court noted that it looked to the Restatement of Agency to determine the general common law of agency in the TCPA context. Wilson v. PL Phase One Operations L.P., 422 F.Supp.3d 971, 980. S.D.Miss.Bkrtcy.Ct.2019. Cit. generally in sup. In Chapter 7 proceedings for debtor, lender filed an adversary proceeding against debtor's sole member and manager, seeking to recover on his alleged personal guaranty of a loan that debtor obtained from lender to finance the purchase of an airplane. This court denied defendant's motion for summary judgment, in which he argued that his signature on the guaranty was forged, holding that questions of fact remained as to whether defendant ratified the guaranty through his conduct after he became aware of the purported forgery even though the evidence did not show who signed his name. The court noted that Mississippi courts, which routinely looked to the Restatement Third of Agency for guidance, had adopted the position of Restatement Third of Agency § 4.03, which provided that a person could ratify a forgery. In re World Health Jets LLC, 610 B.R. 118, 147. W.D.Okl.2019. Cit. generally in case cit. in sup., cit. generally in ftn. Former employer sued, among others, three former employees, alleging that they breached their fiduciary duties to employer when they helped found a competing company during their tenure with employer. This court denied in part employees' motion to dismiss, holding that employer sufficiently alleged that employees owed it a fiduciary duty. The court noted that, while Oklahoma courts had not yet adopted the Restatement Third of Agency, it had little difficulty predicting that the Oklahoma Supreme Court would adopt provisions of the Restatement Third of Agency that recognized a fiduciary duty of loyalty owed by an employee to an employer. ATS Group, LLC v. Legacy Tank and Industrial Services LLC, 407 F.Supp.3d 1186, 1193, 1194. CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTORY MATTERS TOPIC 1. DEFINITIONS AND TERMINOLOGY § 1.01. Agency Defined COPYRIGHT ©2020 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America 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:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most