For Your Data Blackburn V. Witter Example Brief
May 15, 2015
Edit
Blackburn v. Witter illustration brief summary
xix Cal. Rptr. 842 (1962)
CASE FACTS
The customer was the widow of a dairy farmer who did non possess got job organisation experience. She selected an agent of the brokerage companies to serve every bit her investment advisor. The agent told the customer that the brokerage companies had inquiry divisions that advised when to purchase as well as sell stock. The agent persuaded the customer to invest inward a nonexistent company. The customer filed an activity against the brokerage companies for fraud to recover the misappropriated money.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The lawsuit courtroom entered judgment inward favor of the customer nether the theory of ostensible authority. The brokerage companies appealed.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The courtroom affirmed the lawsuit court's judgment for the customer inward the client's activity against the brokerage companies for fraud.
Recommended Supplements for Corporations as well as Business Associations Law
xix Cal. Rptr. 842 (1962)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Appellant brokerage companies as well as their bonding agencies (brokerage companies) challenged the determination of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County (California), which entered judgment for respondent customer inward her activity for fraud afterward an agent of the brokerage companies misappropriated funds.CASE FACTS
The customer was the widow of a dairy farmer who did non possess got job organisation experience. She selected an agent of the brokerage companies to serve every bit her investment advisor. The agent told the customer that the brokerage companies had inquiry divisions that advised when to purchase as well as sell stock. The agent persuaded the customer to invest inward a nonexistent company. The customer filed an activity against the brokerage companies for fraud to recover the misappropriated money.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The lawsuit courtroom entered judgment inward favor of the customer nether the theory of ostensible authority. The brokerage companies appealed.
DISCUSSION
- The courtroom affirmed, finding that at that spot was substantial prove to back upwards the lawsuit court's judgment that the customer acted amongst ordinary care.
- The courtroom reasoned that the inquiry services that the brokerage companies used to stimulate the customer to rely upon them for advice contributed to the fraud.
- The courtroom likewise constitute that the brokerage companies failed to inform the customer of the limitations to the agent's authority.
- The courtroom noted that the brokerage companies could non possess got the benefits of the sale of the stock yesteryear the agent as well as likewise deny liability for the fraudulent misuse of the money.
CONCLUSION
The courtroom affirmed the lawsuit court's judgment for the customer inward the client's activity against the brokerage companies for fraud.
Recommended Supplements for Corporations as well as Business Associations Law