O'Neal v. Crumpton Builders, Inc.
| Decision Date | 17 July 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. D-207,D-207 |
| Citation | 143 So.2d 344 |
| Parties | Eli O'NEAL, Appellant, v. CRUMPTION BUILDERS, INC., a Florida Corporation, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Milbrath, O'Neill & Walkup, Ocala, for appellant.
Gregory, Cours & Paniello, Tampa, for appellee.
Appeal by Eli O'Neal, plaintiff below, from an order granting defendant Crumpton's (a Florida corporation) motion to dismiss plaintiff's second amended complaint.
The sole point on this appeal is directed toward the sufficiency of plaintiff's allegations pertaining to the authority of one James J. Martin to bind the corporate defendant.
Material allegations of the second amended complaint going to this point are:
(1) Plaintiff entered into a contract with defendant by and through its agent and manager, James J. Martin, to perform certain land clearing work and to furnish certain materials in the preparation of land for the defendant; (2) Martin represented to plaintiff that he was agent and manager of defendant and authorized to employ plaintiff to accomplish said work; and (3) shortly prior to entering into this contract, defendant had recognized similar contracts made by Martin with plaintiff and performed the obligations thereunder, thereby clothing Martin with the indicia of agency. The remaining allegations concerned performance and breach.
Plaintiff's foregoing allegations are clearly founded upon the principle of law that an agent's authority may be conferred in writing or it may be inferred from the related facts of the case. 1 This rule is the established law of this jurisdiction and is found to have been enunciated recently in Tampa Sand & Material Company v. Davis, 2 the facts being similar to the allegations under consideration. There, George R. Davis, individually, purchased land and transferred title to a development corporation, Golden Gateway Homes, Inc. George R. Davis, individually, Davis Construction Corporation, and Golden Gateway Homes, Inc., were sued by Tampa Sand & Material Company for materials furnished as a result of its representative having contacted L. W. Tucker, the project construction superintendent, concerning concrete for the project. Evidence was presented of agency and ostensible agency and of real and apparent authority on the part of Tucker to bind Davis Construction Company. 3 In sustaining the judgment against Davis Construction Corporation, Judge Kanner, speaking for the Second District Court of Appeal, enunciated the rule to be applied in the instant cause when he stated on page 127 of 125 So.2d:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wool Wholesale Plumbing Supply, Inc. v. Abdo
...directly otherwise, and this allegation must be regarded as true in testing the sufficiency of the complaint. O'Neal v. Crumpton Builders, Inc., 143 So.2d 344 (Fla. 1st DCA 1962). Particularly in view of the explanation of the March 24 date in the complaint itself, 2 it surely cannot be sai......
-
American Ladder & Scaffold Co. v. Miami Ventilated Awning Mfg. Co., 63-440
...Miller, 156 Fla. 388, 24 So.2d 48; Tampa Sand & Material Company v. Davis, Fla.App.1960, 125 So.2d 126, 127; O'Neal v. Crumpton Builders, Inc., Fla.App.1962, 143 So.2d 344, 345; 1 Fla.Jur., Agency, §§ 22, 34-36. In the Tampa Sand & Material Company case the rule was well stated by Judge Kan......
-
Bryan & Sons Corp. v. Klefstad
...actions. Stiles v. Gordon Land Co., Fla.1950, 44 So.2d 417; Russell v. Eckert, Fla.App.1967, 195 So.2d 617; O'Neal v. Crumpton Builders, Inc., Fla.App.1962, 143 So.2d 344. The effect of this change made in the field by the plaintiffs' engineers was to increase the quantity of excavation on ......
-
Hobbs Const. & Development, Inc. v. Colonial Concrete Co.
...such authority to where the principal by his actions or words holds the agent out as possessing it. See also O'Neal v. Crumpton Builders, Inc., 143 So.2d 344 (Fla. 1st DCA 1962); Taco Bell of California v. Zappone, 324 So.2d 121 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1975); 2 Fla.Jur.2nd, Agency and Employment § 35......