微信扫一扫
实时资讯全掌握
| Dixon Sales, Inc. dismissed Crow as its general sales agent. Dixon notified all of Crow’s known customers by letter. Hale Stores, a retail outlet located outside of Crow’s previously assigned sales territory, had never dealt with Crow. However, Hale knew of Crow as a result of various business contacts. After his dismissal, Crow sold Hale goods, to be delivered by Dixon, and received from Hale a cash deposit for 20% of the purchase price. It was not unusual for an agent in Crow’s previous position to receive cash deposits. In an action by Hale against Dixon on the sales contract, Hale will A. Lose, because Crow’s conduct constituted a fraud for which Dixon is not liable. B. Lose, because Crow lacked any express or implied authority to make the contract. C. Win, because Dixon’s notice was inadequate to terminate Crow’s apparent authority. D. Win, because a principal is an insurer of an agent’s acts. |