Vescelius v. Martin

11 Colo. 391
CourtSupreme Court of Colorado
DecidedApril 15, 1888
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 11 Colo. 391 (Vescelius v. Martin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Colorado primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Vescelius v. Martin, 11 Colo. 391 (Colo. 1888).

Opinion

De France, C.

The evidence in this case fails to disclose that W. S. Vescelius was possessed of authority [393]*393from his wife, the defendant, to make the contract sued upon. Without such proof the action must fail. The most that can be claimed for the evidence in this respect is that the husband was agent for the wife in conducting a retail grocery business. Granting the fact that his agency was a general one for this purpose, it does not follow that he had authority to sell out the entire business, stock and fixtures in one transaction. This authority is not to be implied from such an agency. But, if it were, the further authority in such agent to employ some one else to do so at the cost of his principal cannot be implied therefrom. It is not necessary to notice the other questions discussed by counsel. The evidence being insufficient to support the same, the judgment should be reversed and the cause remanded.

Bising and Stallcup, 00., concur.

Per Curiam.

For the reasons assigned in the foregoing opinion the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed.

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

Related

Chartrand v. Brace
16 Colo. 19 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1891)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
11 Colo. 391, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vescelius-v-martin-colo-1888.