 | Floyd Russell Mechem - 1925 - 904 páginas
...acts done by his servant in the course of his employment, although the master did not authorize or know of the servant's act or neglect, or even if he disapproved or forbade it. Philadelphia & Reading Railroad v. Derby, 14 How. (US) 468, 486. And the relation of master and servant... | |
 | George Luther Clark - 1922 - 412 páginas
...121 SW 1026; 23 HLR 304, 26 id. 175. 10. Philadelphia etc. RR v. Derby (1852) 14 How. 468: "It makss no difference that the master did not authorize, or even know of the servant's act or neg1ect, or even if he disapproved or forbade it. he is equally liable, if the act be done tn the course... | |
 | 1884 - 548 páginas
...negligent, fraudulent or deceitful. If it be done in the course of his employment, the master is liable ; and it makes no difference that the master did not...be done in the course of his servant's employment." The authorities to this point might be multiplied indefinitely; but these are sufficient. Tried by... | |
 | 1887 - 672 páginas
...Philadelphia & RR Co. v. Derby,'-' 'it be done in the course of his employment, the master is liable ; and it makes no difference that the master did not...if the act be done in the course of his servant's employment.'3 ' This rule,' the court of appeals of New York well says, ' is founded upon public policy... | |
 | 1922 - 360 páginas
...negligent, fraudulent or deceitful. If it be done in the course of his employment, the master is liable and it makes no difference that the master did not...be done in the course of his servant's employment." *« Though there is no absolute justice in holding a careful employer liable for the wrong of another... | |
 | United States. Congress. House. Committee on the Judiciary - 1932 - 74 páginas
...something his employer did not authorize, if it was done in the course of employment, the master is liable and it makes no difference that the master did not...disapproved or forbade it, he is equally liable if done in the course of the servant's employment. Is there any reason why this rule of law should not... | |
 | United States. Supreme Court - 1889 - 1068 páginas
...acte done by bis servant iu the course of bis employment, although tbe master did not authorize or know of the servant's act or neglect, or even If he disapproved of or forbade it. 2. Tbe relation of master and servant exists whenover the employer retains the right... | |
 | 1922 - 964 páginas
...[the servant's] employment, the master is liable; ami it makes no difference that the master did j not authorize, or even know of the servant's act or...be done in the course of his servant's employment. See Story on Agency, § 452; Smith on Master and Servant, 152." Railroad Co. v. Derby, supra, and cases... | |
 | 1922 - 1364 páginas
...application, whether the act is "tie of omi-sion or commission, whether negligent, fraudulent, or deceitful: and it makes no difference that the master did not...neglect, or, even if he disapproved or forbade it, he k equally liable if the act is done in the course of his servant's employment. Chicago. HI & PR Co.... | |
 | 1912 - 588 páginas
...negligent, fraudulent or deceitful. If it be done in the course of his employment, the master is liable and it makes no difference that the master did not...servant's act or neglect, or even if he disapproved or forbad it ; he is equally liable if the act be done in the course of his servant's employment." There... | |
| |
If it be done in the course of his employment, the master is liable ; and it makes no difference that the master did not authorize, or even know of the servant's act or neglect, or even if he disapproved or forbade it, he is equally liable, if the act... 
