ROBERTO PINON AND JACQUELINE PINON, APPELLANTS,
v.
INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY, A FOREIGN CORPORATION, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Agency By Estoppel cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant seeks damages from appellee by demonstrating an agency relationship between appellee and the car dealership from which she purchased her used vehicle. She appeals from an adverse summary judgment on that issue. We affirm.
Appellee’s contract with the offending dealership as a franchise agreement, and the elements of agency are not found within its four corners; injured third persons, arguably including appellant sub judice, may nonetheless assert such a relationship based on estoppel, apparent authority, or ratification. However, absent here is the principal’s prior or subsequent representation, either express or by implication, that the dealership acted as its agent; it is appellant’s burden to demonstrate such representation, Bernstein v. Dwork, 320 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975), cert. denied 336 So. 2d 599 (Fla.1976); she was unable to allege facts bringing appellee’s status to issue: Summary judgment was properly entered.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Chase Manhattan Mortg. Corp. v. Scott, 694 So. 2d 827 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)…nce of an agency relationship may be established expressly, or by estoppel, apparent authority, or ratification. The party who seeks to establish the existence of such a relationship carries the burden of proof. Pinon v. International Harvester Co., 390 So. 2d 154 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). A key element in establishing an agency relationship is that of control. In Ortega v. General Motors Corp., 392 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980), we defined the level of control necessary to find a principal/agent relationship as fo…
-
Kobel v. Marc I. Schlosser, M.D., 614 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)…477 So. 2d 1060 (Fla.2d DCA 1985), rev. denied, 486 So. 2d 595 (Fla.1986); Jaar, 474 So. 2d at 242. While it was appellants’ burden to prove the agency relationship as the party alleging that relationship, see Pinon v. International Harvester Co., 390 So. 2d 154 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), it remained appellee’s burden to prove the absence of material fact issues as the summary judgment mov-ant. See, e.g., Parker v. Dinsmore Co., 443 So. 2d 356, 358 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). We find that this latter burden has not been…
-
Myron Orlinsky v. Patraka, 971 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)…that he controlled or had the right to control Orlinsky’s dealings with the foreign inves [*801] tors, which is an element of an agency relationship. Goldschmidt v. Holman, 571 So. 2d 422, 424 n. 5 (Fla.1990). See also Pinon v. Int’l Harvester Co., 390 So. 2d 154 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). This theory is another attempt to retool Patraka’s count for breach of an oral contract. The trial court granted a directed verdict on the breach of contract count. Patraka has not cross-appealed the directed verdict for Orlinsk…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Bernstein v. Dwork, 320 So. 2d 472 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)