This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: liable. Strich had apparent authority to make the contract in the name of Plymouth Optical Co. Since Plymouth knew about what Strich was doing,for three years and did nothing to stop him. Doing so, Plymouth became compliant. 11. No. Although she had explicitly forbidden Farley to purchase the outfits in question, Martha still placed Farley in the position of manager of the store with power of purchase, and Womens Wear Inc. had no knowledge that Farley was not suppose to buy blue jeans. Martha then was liable for the purchase made by her agent, Farley. 13. This is a case of effect of proper exercise of authority. No. When Fox made the contract with Lanceford, she acted as an agent. Therefore, the contract was made in Hollanders name.Fox was not a party to the contract and therefore could not sue Lanceford for failure to perform it....
View Full Document
- Spring '10
- Business Law