For Your Data Full General Overseas Films, Ltd. V. Robin International, Inc. Illustration Brief
May 18, 2016
Edit
General Overseas Films, Ltd. v. Robin International, Inc. instance brief summary
542 F. Supp. 684 (1982)
CASE FACTS
The principal argued that the guarantee extended past times the agent did non bind the principal because the agent lacked actual or apparent potency to engage inwards the transaction. The cinema fellowship conceded that the agent had no actual potency exactly relied alone on the agent's apparent authority.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The courtroom entered judgment for the principal, amongst costs. The instance was unopen without prejudice to reopening against the bankrupt fellowship afterward the remain occasioned past times its involuntary bankruptcy proceedings was lifted.
Recommended Supplements for Corporations together with Business Associations Law
542 F. Supp. 684 (1982)
CASE SYNOPSIS
The partied stipulated to submit a instance for judgment past times the court, inwards lieu of trial, upon an agreed tape where plaintiff cinema fellowship sought to collect on a loan guarantee that it alleged was provided on behalf of accused principal fellowship past times its agent, the principal's vice president together with treasurer, to the cinema company's producer. The cinema fellowship claimed that the principal past times the agent guaranteed repayment of loans made to a bankrupt company.CASE FACTS
The principal argued that the guarantee extended past times the agent did non bind the principal because the agent lacked actual or apparent potency to engage inwards the transaction. The cinema fellowship conceded that the agent had no actual potency exactly relied alone on the agent's apparent authority.
DISCUSSION
- The courtroom held that the agent lacked apparent potency to engage inwards the transactions.
- Under the police of New York, the circumstances of the transaction known to the cinema fellowship had to hold upwardly scrutinized to create upwardly one's remove heed whether it fulfilled its principal "duty of inquiry."
- The transaction involved inwards this instance was extraordinary together with should accept alerted the producer to the danger of fraud.
- Because the circumstances surrounding the transaction were such every mo to seat the producer on notice of the demand to demand farther into the agent's ability together with skillful faith, the principal was non bound.
- The testify failed to industrial plant life that the principal through its bear misled the cinema fellowship then every mo to warrant a finding that the agent had "apparent authority" to bind the principal to the guarantee.
- The producer's negligence, non the principal's, precipitated the loss.
CONCLUSION
The courtroom entered judgment for the principal, amongst costs. The instance was unopen without prejudice to reopening against the bankrupt fellowship afterward the remain occasioned past times its involuntary bankruptcy proceedings was lifted.
Recommended Supplements for Corporations together with Business Associations Law