¶1Where the relation of principal and agent is created- and exists, the presumption is that such relation continues as to goods and proceeds of sale; and to rebut such presumption, an agreement clear and expressive to the contrary is necessary. It will not do, therefore, to resort to ambiguous or doubtful phrases or language for the purpose of spelling out such an agreement. Talcing the contract in its entirety, the intent of the parties to continue, as to the proceeds of sale, the relation of principal and agent is reasonably free from doubt; and the contract cannot be construed into an agreement to establish, as to the proceeds, the relation of debtor and creditor. I, therefore, concur with Mr. Justice Williams for affirmance.
17 A.D. 340
In re Chambers
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided July 1, 1897
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · decided 1897-07-01
Appeal by John E. Jacobs, receiver of James Chambers, Limited, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the Hew Ybrk Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Hew York on the 21st day of December,. 1896, directing him to pay the petitioner the proceeds of sale of certain goods.
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently March 2002
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1897-07-01
View the full empirical analysis of this case →