 The general rule is, that the master is answerable for every such wrong of the servant or agent as is committed in the course of the service and for the master's benefit, though no express command or privity of the master be proved.  United States Reports: Cases Adjudged in the Supreme Court - Página 426por United States. Supreme Court, John Chandler Bancroft Davis, Henry Putzel, Henry C. Lind, Frank D. Wagner - 1889Visualização integral - Acerca deste livro
 | 1907 - 1048 páginas
...the master is answerable for every such wrong of the servant or agent as is committed in the course of the service and for the master's benefit, though...express command or privity of the master be proved." This was approved of in McKay v. Commercial Bank of New Brunswick, LR 5 PC 394 ; Citizens Life Assurance... | |
 | 1907 - 1566 páginas
...the master is answerable for every such wrong of the servant or agent as is committed in the course of the service and for the master's benefit, though...express command or privity of the master be proved." The rule thus expressed has since been repeatedly approved and adopted in the House of Lords, the Privy... | |
 | 1909 - 1278 páginas
...the master Is answerable for every such wrong of the servant or agent as Is committed in the course of the service and for the master's benefit, though...express command or privity of the master be proved." That statement of the rule has frequently been quoted and referred to with approval. See British Mutual... | |
 | 1909 - 1282 páginas
...for every such wrong of tlie servant or agent as is committed In the course of the service and fur the master's benefit, though no express command or privity of the master be proved." That statement of the rule has frequently been quoted and referred to with approval. See British Mutual... | |
 | Edward Betley Brown, L. S. Le Vernois, Esten Kenneth Williams - 1910 - 774 páginas
...the master is answerable for every such wrong of the servant or agent as is committed in the course of the service and for the master's benefit, though...express command or privity of the master be proved." This statement of the law has been approved of in many subsequent cases. See Beven' on Negligence,... | |
 | Edward Betley Brown, L. S. Le Vernois, Esten Kenneth Williams - 1911 - 834 páginas
...a master is answerable for every Ptich wrong of the servant or agent as is committed in the rourse of the service and for the master's benefit, though...express command or privity of the master be proved. See Odgers (Broom) on Common Law (1911). pp. 484, 485. This principle is fully set forth in the opinion... | |
 | 1911 - 1064 páginas
...the master is answerable for every such wrong of the servant or agent as is committed in the course of the service and for the master's benefit, though...express command or privity of the master be proved." This principle was expressly held to be applicable to trade unions in Toff Vale Ry. Co. v. Amalgamated... | |
 | United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Interstate Commerce - 1912 - 436 páginas
...the master is answerable for every such wrong of the servant or agent as is committed in the course of the service and for the master's benefit, though...proved." (See also Limpus v. London General Omnibus Co., lH & C., 526.) The fraud was in respect to a matter within the scope of Easton's employment or outside... | |
 | 1912 - 768 páginas
...the master is answerable for every such wrong of the servant or agent as is committed in the course of the service and for the master's benefit, though...express command or privity of the master be proved." He goes on to cite instances, as where owners of ships have been held liable in trespass for the acts... | |
 | Edson Read Sunderland - 1914 - 860 páginas
...in England, is that the master is answerable for every wrong of his servant committed in the course of the service and for the master's benefit, though...express command or privity of the master be proved. Wharton on Negligence, Par. 161 ; Mitchell v. Crassweller, 76 Eng. CL 236. A master is not liable for... | |
| |
