34 Mich. 247 (Mich. 1876), Grover & Baker Sewing Machine Co. v. Polhemus

Citation34 Mich. 247
Opinion JudgeGraves, J.
Party NameThe Grover & Baker Sewing Machine Company v. Jacob A. Polhemus and another
AttorneyJoslin & Whitman, for plaintiff in error. Frazer & Hamilton, for defendants in error.
Case DateJune 13, 1876
CourtSupreme Court of Michigan

Page 247

34 Mich. 247 (Mich. 1876)

The Grover & Baker Sewing Machine Company

v.

Jacob A. Polhemus and another

Supreme Court of Michigan

June 13, 1876

Submitted on Briefs April 20, 1876

Error to Washtenaw Circuit.

Judgment reversed, with costs, and a new trial ordered.

Joslin & Whitman, for plaintiff in error.

Frazer & Hamilton, for defendants in error.

OPINION

Page 248

Graves, J.

The circuit court adjudged the plaintiff in error liable to defendants in error in a suit on the common counts for horse keeping and livery hire, and error is alleged.

The company, through their general agent, F. A. VanBuren, bargained with one Wissler to sell their sewing machines in Washtenaw county and vicinity, on the following understanding: they were to provide him a room in Ann Arbor, a horse and buggy and the machines, and he was to sell the machines and have thirty per cent. commission as compensation. The room and horse and buggy were provided, and machines as needed were supplied, and he prosecuted the business for some time under the arrangement. He called on defendants in error and contracted with them specially to board the horse, and they did so for several months and sometimes used the animal with his assent. He also got livery of them at various times. He informed them in the beginning that the company owned the horse. They charged the entire account for horse keeping and livery directly against him, and he paid them the larger portion of it. The recovery allowed against the company was for the balance of this entire account. As their witness, he swore that if he had paid it he would not have been entitled to ask the company to reimburse him. According to the record there was not the least ground for claiming that he had authority to get the horse boarded or obtain livery on the credit of the

Page 249

company, or that the company held him out as having such power, or ever assumed in any form the liability therefor, or did any thing to make the liability their own. Moreover there would seem to have been no proper evidence that he contracted on company account, or any lawful evidence legitimately tending to show that defendants in error gave credit to any body except Wissler. Some evidence was admitted that when he called to get the horse boarded he stated it was for the company. But he could not invest himself with authority to bind...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP
10 practice notes
  • 157 N.W. 973 (N.D. 1916), Groff v. Cook
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court of North Dakota
    • 19 Abril 1916
    ...authority, nor are they proof of agency. Hirschfield v. Waldron, 54 Mich. 649, 20 N.W. 628; Grover & B. Sewing Mach. Co. v. Polhemus, 34 Mich. 247; Reynolds v. Continental Ins. Co. 36 Mich. 131; McDonough v. Heyman, 38 Mich. 334. Entries made by a clerk or agent must have been made by t......
  • 29 N.W. 482 (Mich. 1886), Bond v. Pontiac, O. & P.A.R. Co.
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court of Michigan
    • 7 Octubre 1886
    ...concerning his own agency. Trudo v. Anderson, 10 Mich. 357; Kornemann v. Monaghan, 24 Mich. 36; Grover & Baker S.M. Co. v. Polhemus, 34 Mich. 247; Reynolds v. Continental Ins. Co., 36 Mich. 131; Bowen v. School-district No. 9, Id. 149; Michigan Paneling Co. v. Parsell, 38 Mich. 475; Ric......
  • 39 Mich. 644 (Mich. 1878), New York Iron Mine v. First National Bank of Negaunee
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court of Michigan
    • 21 Noviembre 1878
    ...of agents of corporations to bind their principals, Hammond v. Mich. State Bank, Walk. Ch., 214; Grover & Baker S. M. Co. v. Polhemus, 34 Mich. 249; Reynolds v. Cont. Ins. Co., 36 Mich. 131; Lyell v. Sanbourn, 2 Mich. 109; M., H. & O. R. R. Co. v. Taft, 28 Mich. 289; Kal. Nov. Mfg. ......
  • 232 N.W. 360 (Mich. 1930), 123, Union Trust Co. v. Parker
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court of Michigan
    • 3 Octubre 1930
    ...rule otherwise, the fortune of every man would rest on the veracity of his errand boy.' Grover & Baker Sewing Machine Co. v. Polhemus, 34 Mich. 247. 'A party dealing with the agent of a corporation must, at his peril, ascertain what authority the agent possesses, and is not at liberty t......
  • Free signup to view additional results
10 cases
  • 157 N.W. 973 (N.D. 1916), Groff v. Cook
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court of North Dakota
    • 19 Abril 1916
    ...authority, nor are they proof of agency. Hirschfield v. Waldron, 54 Mich. 649, 20 N.W. 628; Grover & B. Sewing Mach. Co. v. Polhemus, 34 Mich. 247; Reynolds v. Continental Ins. Co. 36 Mich. 131; McDonough v. Heyman, 38 Mich. 334. Entries made by a clerk or agent must have been made by t......
  • 29 N.W. 482 (Mich. 1886), Bond v. Pontiac, O. & P.A.R. Co.
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court of Michigan
    • 7 Octubre 1886
    ...concerning his own agency. Trudo v. Anderson, 10 Mich. 357; Kornemann v. Monaghan, 24 Mich. 36; Grover & Baker S.M. Co. v. Polhemus, 34 Mich. 247; Reynolds v. Continental Ins. Co., 36 Mich. 131; Bowen v. School-district No. 9, Id. 149; Michigan Paneling Co. v. Parsell, 38 Mich. 475; Ric......
  • 39 Mich. 644 (Mich. 1878), New York Iron Mine v. First National Bank of Negaunee
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court of Michigan
    • 21 Noviembre 1878
    ...of agents of corporations to bind their principals, Hammond v. Mich. State Bank, Walk. Ch., 214; Grover & Baker S. M. Co. v. Polhemus, 34 Mich. 249; Reynolds v. Cont. Ins. Co., 36 Mich. 131; Lyell v. Sanbourn, 2 Mich. 109; M., H. & O. R. R. Co. v. Taft, 28 Mich. 289; Kal. Nov. Mfg. ......
  • 232 N.W. 360 (Mich. 1930), 123, Union Trust Co. v. Parker
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court of Michigan
    • 3 Octubre 1930
    ...rule otherwise, the fortune of every man would rest on the veracity of his errand boy.' Grover & Baker Sewing Machine Co. v. Polhemus, 34 Mich. 247. 'A party dealing with the agent of a corporation must, at his peril, ascertain what authority the agent possesses, and is not at liberty t......
  • Free signup to view additional results