Boise Dodge, Inc. v. Clark case brief summary
453 P.2d 551 (1969)
CASE FACTS
Respondent purchased what he believed to be a new car from appellant. The car was in fact a demonstrator model. The odometer on the car had been set back by appellant's employee. Respondent was awarded $ 12,500 in punitive damages. Appellant alleged that the award of punitive damages was improper, arguing that the issue should not have been submitted to the jury inasmuch as a corporation could not be held liable for punitive damages based upon the acts of its agents, unless the corporation participated in the wrongdoing or ratified it.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The judgment awarding respondent punitive damages was affirmed because appellant effectively ratified the wrongful acts of his employee by following through on the sale of the car to respondent with knowledge that the odometer had been set back.
Recommended Supplements and Study Aids for Property Law
Shop for Law School Course Materials
.
453 P.2d 551 (1969)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Appellant sought review of the judgment
of the district court (Idaho) granting respondent punitive damages in
appellant's action alleging breach of contract in connection with the
sale of a car by appellant to respondent.CASE FACTS
Respondent purchased what he believed to be a new car from appellant. The car was in fact a demonstrator model. The odometer on the car had been set back by appellant's employee. Respondent was awarded $ 12,500 in punitive damages. Appellant alleged that the award of punitive damages was improper, arguing that the issue should not have been submitted to the jury inasmuch as a corporation could not be held liable for punitive damages based upon the acts of its agents, unless the corporation participated in the wrongdoing or ratified it.
DISCUSSION
- The court held that, when corporate officials engaged in fraudulent acts in furtherance of the corporation, the acts of such agents were attributed to the corporation.
- Appellant's general manager admitted that he knew the odometer had been set back, and that he allowed the sale with full knowledge of the deception inherent in the situation; thus, appellant corporation ratified the wrongdoing.
CONCLUSION
The judgment awarding respondent punitive damages was affirmed because appellant effectively ratified the wrongful acts of his employee by following through on the sale of the car to respondent with knowledge that the odometer had been set back.
Recommended Supplements and Study Aids for Property Law
Shop for Law School Course Materials
.
No comments:
Post a Comment