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

Case Citations [i] (2016)

handle is hein.ali/relagcy0127 and id is 1 raw text is: AGENCY CHAPTER 4. RATIFICATION TOPIC 2. WHEN AFFIRMANCE RESULTS IN RATIFICATION § 90. Affirmance of Demands and Notifications C.A.9, 2016. Cit. in sup. and cit. in case cit. in sup. (general cite). The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau filed a civil enforcement action against attorney who operated a business that provided home- loan-modification services, alleging that defendant engaged in unfair and deceptive practices in violation of federal law by suggesting that his business was affiliated with the government. The district court granted summary judgment for the Bureau, rejecting attorney's argument that the Bureau lacked authority to bring the action against him because its director at the time the action was filed had been unconstitutionally appointed. Affirming in part, this court held that, although the director's initial recess appointment was invalid, any initial constitutional deficiencies were cured by his subsequent valid confirmation, and his subsequent issuance of a notice of ratification for actions taken prior to the valid confirmation. The court noted that federal courts had applied the first Restatement of Agency in matters related to the Appointments Clause. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Gordon, 819 F.3d 1179, 1191. CHAPTER 7. LIABILITY OF PRINCIPAL TO THIRD PERSON; TORTS TOPIC 2. LIABILITY FOR AUTHORIZED CONDUCT OR CONDUCT INCIDENTAL THERETO TITLE B. TORTS OF SERVANTS SPECIFIC TORTS OF SERVANTS § 247. Defamation D.Ariz.2015. Cit. in sup. Co-founder of a parent corporation and its wholly owned subsidiary filed a defamation claim against other co-founder, alleging that defendant made defamatory statements about plaintiff in a letter from subsidiary to its customers, in a letter from defendant's attorney, and in a letter from an employee of subsidiary to an employee of a hospital. This court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment, holding that plaintiff failed to state a viable claim for defamation against defendant with respect to the statements made by the subsidiary, its employee, and defendant's attorney-none of whom were defendants in this action. Although Restatement of Agency § 247 provided that a principal was potentially liable for defamatory statements made by his or her agents in certain circumstances, plaintiff failed to cite § 247 or to show that the predicates to liability under § 247 were present here. Wichansky v. Zowine, 150 F.Supp.3d 1055, 1075. -A L 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