Poretta v Superior Dowel Company: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Created page with "A contemporary american case on undisclosed agency, undisclosed principals and so on, containing a lengthy disquisition on the merits (few) of Lord T..." |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) m Amwelladmin moved page Poretta v Superior Dowel Company - Case Note to Poretta v Superior Dowel Company |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
A contemporary | {{cn}}A contemporary American case on [[Undisclosed agent|undisclosed agency]], [[undisclosed principal]]s and so on, containing a lengthy disquisition on the merits (few) of Lord Tenterden’s rule from {{casenote|Thompson|Davenport}} and (great) of Parke B’s scornful disagreement with that dictum, as set out in {{casenote|Heald|Kenworthy}}. | ||
(transcript [http://law.justia.com/cases/maine/supreme-court/1957/137-a-2d-361-0.html here]). | (transcript [http://law.justia.com/cases/maine/supreme-court/1957/137-a-2d-361-0.html here]). | ||
Latest revision as of 19:20, 19 December 2020
|
The Jolly Contrarian Law Reports
Our own, snippy, in-house court reporting service.
|
A contemporary American case on undisclosed agency, undisclosed principals and so on, containing a lengthy disquisition on the merits (few) of Lord Tenterden’s rule from Thompson v Davenport and (great) of Parke B’s scornful disagreement with that dictum, as set out in Heald v Kenworthy.
(transcript here).