Feltus v. Swan
62 Miss. 415
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the court.
The appellee being a mere agent was not liable for an omission of duty except to his principal. Story on Agency, §§ 308, 309; Wharton on Agency, §§ 535, 536 ; Dunlap’s Paley’s Agency 396.
The proposed amendment would not have made the declaration good, for whatever motive operated on the agent, the charge against him was only that he had failed to do, and not that he had done anything maliciously, and for nonfeasance or omission to act at all the agent is answerable only to his employer.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Feltus v. Swan, 62 Miss. 415 (Mich. 1884).
62 Miss. 415 (Feltus v. Swan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Mims v. Frady
461 F. Supp. 736 (N.D. Mississippi, 1978)
Mississippi Power & Light Co. v. Smith
153 So. 376 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1934)
E. H. Emery & Co. v. American Reprigerator Transit Co.
193 Iowa 93 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1921)
Minor v. Dockery
88 So. 321 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1921)
Mullican v. Meridian Light & Ry. Co.
83 So. 816 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1920)
Gloster Lumber Co. v. Wilkinson
79 So. 97 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1918)
People v. Potter
3 Ill. Cir. Ct. 393 (Illinois Circuit Court, 1908)
Lough v. John Davis & Co.
59 L.R.A. 802 (Washington Supreme Court, 1902)
Steinhauser v. Spraul
28 S.W. 620 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1895)
Burns v. Pethcal
27 N.Y.S. 499 (New York Supreme Court, 1894)