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

Case Citations [1] (July 2020 - April 2021)

handle is hein.ali/resndacy0135 and id is 1 raw text is: AGENCY 2D
C.A.8, 2020. Cit. generally in cases cit. in sup. Borrower sued loan servicer and affiliated entities,
alleging that defendants were liable for breach of the parties' credit agreement, which arose when
assignee of the loan applied excessive interest charges in violation of state law. The district court denied
defendants' motion to compel arbitration pursuant to the agreement's arbitration clause. This court
reversed and remanded, holding, inter alia, that defendants, as nonsignatory agents to the agreement,
could compel arbitration because, under state law, plaintiff's claim arose from a dispute over the credit
agreement, and nonsignatory agents could compel arbitration against a signatory plaintiff when the
alleged liability was based on contractual obligations owed to the plaintiff under the agreement. The
court noted that loan servicer was an agent of assignee under the general principles of agency law set
forth in the Restatement Second of Agency. Neal v. Navient Solutions, LLC, 978 F.3d 572, 576.
D.D.C.2019. Cit. generally in sup. Estate and family of deceased Iraqi contractor brought claims under
the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act against the Islamic Republic of Iran, alleging that defendant
formed, trained, funded, supplied, and directed the terrorist organization that kidnapped, tortured, and
killed contractor. This court granted in part plaintiffs' motion for a default judgment, holding, among
other things, that the Act's terrorism exception to immunity applied because contractor was performing
a United States government contract at the time of his kidnapping, and his actions were within the scope
of that contract. The court noted that District of Columbia courts followed the Restatement Second of
Agency, and that, under Restatement Second of Agency § 228, an employee was acting within the scope
of employment if the purpose of the act was, at least in part, to further the employer's business, and the
act was not unexpected in view of the employee's duties. W.A. v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 427
F.Supp.3d 117, 133.
W.D.Mo.2020. Cit. generally in case cit. in disc. Cellphone user brought a putative class action against
entertainment bar, consulting company, and business company, alleging, inter alia, that consulting
company and business company were vicariously liable for bar's violations of the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act arising from text messages that bar sent to plaintiff without his consent and despite the
fact that he was registered on the national do-not-call registry. This court denied in part defendants'
motion for summary judgment, holding that a reasonable jury could find that bar was the agent of
business company and consulting company and thus could impart liability on them for its actions. The
court noted that federal common law was in accordance with the principles of agency set forth in the
Restatement Second of Agency. Hand v. Beach Entertainment KC, LLC, 456 F.Supp.3d 1099, 1129.
§ 1. Agency; Principal; Agent
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 nearly 3,000 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