Is it irrelevant whether the principal knew or had reason to know its agent was tortiously acting tortiously?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from Magnecomp Corp. v. Athene Co., 209 Cal.App.3d 526, 257 Cal.Rptr. 278 (Cal. App. 1989):

Provided the agent acted within the scope of his authority, it is irrelevant whether the principal knew or had reason to know its agent was acting tortiously. As the court stated in Powell v. Goldsmith (1984) 152 Cal.App.3d 746, 751, 199 Cal.Rptr. 554, "Appellants state they relied completely on 'the honesty and integrity' of [their agent]. Their reliance and trust was misplaced. A principal cannot benefit from the fraud of its agents who is acting in the course and scope of his agency."

Other Questions


Does a principal of a dual agent owe a fiduciary duty to the dual agent's other principal? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether a party can appeal against a finding that a party to the Cannabis Control Act is acting unlawfully? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for evidence that the appellant could reasonably reasonably reasonably expect the appellant to have knowledge of a crime? (California, United States of America)
What is the difference between a reasonable and unreasonable plaintiff and a reasonable plaintiff under a "reasonable implied assumption of risk" approach? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether a reasonable trier of fact could have found defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether a defendant acted with the indicated motivation and intent to commit acts of hatred or ill will? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the test for determining whether trial counsel acted or failed to act in the manner challenged on appeal? (California, United States of America)
What is the objective test in determining whether a criminal act was a natural and probable consequence of another criminal act? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether a defendant can reasonably have reasonably anticipated the events leading up to the action? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether a defendant's reasonableness of their conduct is reasonable? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.