Johnson v. The Pacific Mail S.S Co.

California Supreme Court

Johnson v. The Pacific Mail S.S Co.

5 Cal. 407

California Supreme Court·Decided July 1, 1855·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Heydenfeldt, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.

Murray, C. J., concurred.

There was shown no power on the part of Robinson, Bissell & Co. to employ an agent of the defendants. If the plaintiff had sued for work and labor done as the employee of the Company, possibly the evidence would have entitled him to a recovery. But the present action would be no bar to a subsequent action for that purpose, and therefore the evidence does not support it.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

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

Heydenfeldt, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.

Murray, C. J., concurred.

There was shown no power on the part of Robinson, Bissell & Co. to employ an agent of the defendants. If the plaintiff had sued for work and labor done as the employee of the Company, possibly the evidence would have entitled him to a recovery. But the present action would be no bar to a subsequent action for that purpose, and therefore the evidence does not support it.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Johnson v. The Pacific Mail S.S Co., 5 Cal. 407 (Cal. 1855).

Pincite

5 Cal. 407 (Johnson v. The Pacific Mail S.S Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related