In the case of Hodge v. Garrett 101 Idaho 397, 614.2d 420 (1980), the buyer wished to purchase land located next to the sellers' drive-in movie theater. One seller signed the contract. The testimony was conflicting as to whether the buyer was told that the remaining members of the sellers' partnership would have to agree to the sale. The buyer brought suit when the sellers refused to sell. The trial court found that the one seller, as an agent, bound the sellers' partnership.
Voeller testified that he had told Hodge prior to signing that Hodge would have to present him with a plat plan which would have to be approved by the partners before the property could be sold. Hodge denied that a plat plan had ever been mentioned to him, and he testified that Voeller did not tell him that the approval of the other partners was needed until after the contract was signed. Hodge also testified that he offered to pay Voeller the full purchase price when he signed the contract, but Voeller told him that that was not necessary. The trial court decided that Voeller had actual and apparent power to execute the contract on behalf of the partnership, and that the contract should be enforced. The partners of the Pay-Ont Drive-In Theatre appealed, arguing that Voeller did not have authority to sell the property and that Hodge knew that he did not have such authority.
The court reversed on appeal, finding that the one seller had no authority to make the sale. The seller had no actual authority, and his apparent authority could not extend to matters outside of the ordinary business of a drive-in movie theater. Under Idaho Code 53-309(1), the usual business of the sellers' partnership did not include dealing in real estate. Thus, the contract was unenforceable.
In the case of Konic International...
Otherwise, employers need no specific reason or excuse to terminate at will employment "at will." Even at will employees probably have legal recourse if fired for refusing to obey a law, but in this case, the "urging" did not have legal authority, so the issue is moot. 3. The Sherman Antitrust Act and the Clayton prohibit such "tying" arrangements where the entity maintains extensive control of product supply. Federal antitrust
International Business Law -- Recognition International Recognition Law -- Recognition The number of states in the world map is constantly increasing. In the beginning of 20th century it was fifty five, in the middle it touched the figure of seventy five and by 2005 it soared up to 200 in total (Crawford, 2006). With increase in number of states, the concept of state recognition is also emerging on the international platform, where
Business Law: Arbitration Agreements Arbitration in business law is a method used for mediating contradictions between the parties to an agreement. Arbitration agreements make the requirement that the arbitrators, or those who are over the arbitration discussions and the ultimate agreement are neutral parties and in no way in support of either of the parties to the arbitration process. According to one sources arbitration is "one of the dispute resolution processes being
Business, Law and Ethics Business Law The ethical and legal concepts of a business are normally intertwined. Government put in place effective regulations which necessitate gathering information. When regulatory needs conflict with principles obtained the constitution, ethical and legal needs are raised. Legal strategies nowadays include legal, compliant programs that help institutions to be competitive. Different businesses have one goal of attaining profits, but in the process they should consider different legal
There were many factors quoted for the reasons for this type of incompatibility, and they were the following: Article 2 of the Brussels Convention is in fact mandatory, and it can only be derogated from in the numerous ways and means that have been expressly provided for in the Convention. Similarly, there was no provision for the forum non-conveniens in Article 2 of the Convention, and this was despite the
The ICJ made clear that it did not desire and was not trying to expand its jurisdiction and stated that the issues did not "expand its jurisdiction into new areas by stating that the issues did not "concern the entitlement of the federal states w/in the U.S. To resort to the death penalty for the most heinous crimes" and that the function of the ICJ is to resolve international
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now