Bray & Brother v. Gunn

53 Ga. 144
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJuly 15, 1874
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 53 Ga. 144 (Bray & Brother v. Gunn) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bray & Brother v. Gunn, 53 Ga. 144 (Ga. 1874).

Opinion

McCay, Judge.

If an agent, acting in good faith, disobey the instructions ef his principal, and promptly imforms the principal of what [149]*149he has done, it is the duty of the principal, at the earliest opportunity, to repudiate the act if he disapprove. Silence in such a case is a ratification: See the case of McLendon vs. Wilson & Callaway, 52 Georgia, 41, from Troup county. Taking this correspondence, altogether, we think the jury had a right to find that the plaintiffs were satisfied with the act of Gunn in taking the money in the Kimball funds, and that his dissatisfaction is an after-thought in consequence of the failure of Kimball.. The evidence is convincing that if they had promptly notified Gunn of their dissatisfaction, he could have saved himself. Both the parties here were commercial men, and the rule is a fair and reasonable one that it is the duty of the principal promptly to answer the letters of his agent, and if he do not do so he is presumed to acquiesce in what the agent informs him he has done or proposes to do.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Montgomery v. Van Ronk
195 A. 910 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1937)
Sullivan v. Bennett
246 N.W. 90 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1933)
First Nat. Bank v. Biddle
22 F.2d 11 (Fifth Circuit, 1927)
Royal Bank of Canada v. Universal Export Corp.
10 F.2d 669 (Second Circuit, 1926)
Thompson v. Neely & Wilcox
123 S.E. 171 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1924)
Pilcher & Dillon v. Smith
121 S.E. 701 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1924)
Mendel v. Converse & Co.
118 S.E. 586 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)
Brooke & Co. v. Cunningham Bros.
90 S.E. 1037 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1916)
Lingenfelder v. Leschen
34 S.W. 1089 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1896)
Talcott v. Chew
27 F. 273 (U.S. Circuit Court for the Southern District of Georgia, 1885)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
53 Ga. 144, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bray-brother-v-gunn-ga-1874.