Citation Numbers: 166 A. 677, 117 Conn. 653, 1933 Conn. LEXIS 212
Judges: Maltbie, Haines, Hinman, Banks, Avery
Filed Date: 6/13/1933
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/3/2024
The defendant Mary Lascinski owned a farm upon which the defendant Bobecki held a second mortgage. The plaintiffs are real-estate brokers and claimed that Bobecki, acting as agent for Mrs. Lascinski, requested them to find a purchaser for the farm, and that they did find a purchaser who was ready, able and willing to buy the farm upon the terms prescribed by the owner. The trial court found that Bobecki was the authorized agent of Mrs. Lascinski, and that through him the plaintiffs were employed to sell the farm and did procure a purchaser for it.
One of the plaintiffs was permitted, over objection, to testify that Bobecki told him that he had full authority *Page 654 from Mrs. Lascinski to sell the farm. This ruling is assigned as error.
It is well settled that agency cannot be proven by the declarations of the alleged agent. MetropolitanCleaners Dyers, Inc. v. Tondola,
There is error, and a new trial is ordered.
Commercial Investment Trust, Inc. v. Carrano , 104 Conn. 302 ( 1926 )
Coe v. Kutinsky , 82 Conn. 685 ( 1910 )
Metropolitan Cleaners & Dyers, Inc. v. Tondola , 114 Conn. 244 ( 1932 )
Bosworth v. Bosworth , 131 Conn. 389 ( 1944 )
Milne v. MacWhirter , 128 Conn. 683 ( 1942 )
Cole v. Myers , 128 Conn. 223 ( 1941 )
Gesmundo v. Bush , 133 Conn. 607 ( 1947 )
Baptist v. Shanen , 145 Conn. 605 ( 1958 )
First National Bank & Trust Co. v. Roehl , 146 Conn. 125 ( 1959 )