Rupp v. Stith

Indiana Supreme Court

Rupp v. Stith

33 Ind. 244

DecidedJuly 1, 1870

StatusPublished

This text of 33 Ind. 244 (Rupp v. Stith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rupp v. Stith, 33 Ind. 244 (Ind. 1870).

Pincite

Opinion

Ray, J.

The instructions were clearly correct. It was not in the power of the appellant to relieve himself from the obligation imposed by his contract, to receive the sheep at the point agreed upon. He was required to receive or reject at that place, and his agent could not relieve him from this responsibility and change the point of delivery to the inconvenience of the .appellee. ‘ There can be no question of special agency in this ease. The .act to be performed was an acceptance or rejection of the property tendered, and the agent appointed to act of necessity had power to hind his principal

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

Ray, J.

The instructions were clearly correct. It was not in the power of the appellant to relieve himself from the obligation imposed by his contract, to receive the sheep at the point agreed upon. He was required to receive or reject at that place, and his agent could not relieve him from this responsibility and change the point of delivery to the inconvenience of the .appellee. ‘ There can be no question of special agency in this ease. The .act to be performed was an acceptance or rejection of the property tendered, and the agent appointed to act of necessity had power to hind his principal

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 Ind. 244, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rupp-v-stith-ind-1870.