Cal. Codes » Civil Code
California Codes

Cal. Civil Code § 2343 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

One who assumes to act as an agent is responsible to third persons as a principal for his acts in the course of his agency, in any of the following cases, and in no others:

1.When, with his consent, credit is given to him personally in a transaction;

2.When he enters into a written contract in the name of his principal, without believing, in good faith, that he has authority to do so; or,

3.When his acts are wrongful in their nature.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 48 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1946–2024 · leading case: Peredia v. HR Mobile Servs., Inc., 236 Cal. Rptr. 3d 157 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Peredia v. HR Mobile Servs., Inc., 236 Cal. Rptr. 3d 157 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2018). · cites it 6× “On June 15, 2016, the trial court issued a tentative ruling stating the court intended to grant the motion because " Civil Code section 2343 precludes liability for HR [Mobile] under the circumstances of this case.”
PMC, Inc. v. Kadisha, 93 Cal. Rptr. 2d 663 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 4× “505; Civ. Code, § 2343.) Civil Code section 2343 provides: “One who assumes to act as an agent is responsible to third persons as a principal for his acts in the course of his agency, in any of the following cases, and in no others: [¶] .”
Nasrawi v. Buck Consultants, LLC, 713 F. Supp. 2d 1080 (E.D. Cal. 2010). · cites it 3× “2d 770 (1970), is distinguishable because Loeb personally breached professional duties he owed to the trust and beneficiaries, not just duties he owed to his employer; (2) he committed an intentional tort because he breached fiduciary duties he owed to the trust and its…”
Fiol v. Doellstedt, 96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8393 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “) Third, imposition of personal liability on a supervisor for failing to take action would only marginally increase the likelihood of recovery of damages or prevention of such inaction in the future. ( Janken v.”
Ruiz v. Herman Weissker, Inc., 70 Cal. Comp. Cases 826 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “Finally, the Estate relies on Civil Code section 2343 as the basis for imputing SDG&E’s nondelegable duties to HWI.”
Balsam v. Trancos, Inc., 203 Cal. App. 4th 1083 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “Civil Code section 2343 provides: ‘One who assumes' to act as an agent is responsible to third persons as a principal for his acts in the course of his agency, in any of the following cases, and in no others: [¶].”
Norman I. Krug Real Est. Investments, Inc. v. Praszker, 220 Cal. App. 3d 35 (Cal. Ct. App. 1990). “) Civil Code section 2343 entitled “Agent’s responsibility to third persons” provides that “One who assumes to act as an agent is responsible to third persons as a principal for his acts in the course of his agency, in any of the following cases .”
Hill v. Superior Court, 244 Cal. App. 4th 1281 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016). “But if, in addition to the lack of authority, there is “bad faith” — that is, the agent enters into the contract without believing, in good faith, that he or she has authority to do so — the California rule makes the agent liable on the contract as a principal.”
Dameshghi v. Texaco Refining & Mktg., Inc., 3 Cal. App. 4th 1262 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2× “(Civ. Code, § 2343.) B Attorney Fees Dameshghi raises two challenges to the trial court’s award of attorney fees and costs to the broker/escrow defendants: the trial court acted prematurely in making the award to the “prevailing parties,” since Dameshghi had a month beforehand…”
Phillips v. Gemini Moving Specialists, 63 Cal. Comp. Cases 407 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998). “) 6 In the instant case, plaintiff argues we should reject the holdings in Weinbaum and Jacobs because those cases did not consider the basis of tort liability upon which he relies to support his inclusion of Luni as a defendant, namely, Civil Code section 2343. That section…”
MCA v. State of California, 128 Cal. App. 3d 225 (Cal. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 2× “900 ]; Civ. Code, § 2343, subd. 3.) [3] Fabricant concedes that placement in the Code of Civil Procedure "is not determinative," citing Lewis v.”
Channel Lumber Co., Inc. v. Porter Simon, 2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1914 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000). “(Civ. Code, § 2343; see 2 Witkin, Summary of Cal.”
Show all 48 citing cases →
— Cal. Civil Code § 2343(2) — 1 case
Felt v. L. B. Frederick Co., 206 P.2d 676 (Cal. Ct. App. 1949).
— Cal. Civil Code § 2343(3) — 3 cases
Nasrawi v. Buck Consultants, LLC, 713 F. Supp. 2d 1080 (E.D. Cal. 2010). “2d 770 (1970), is distinguishable because Loeb personally breached professional duties he owed to the trust and beneficiaries, not just duties he owed to his employer; (2) he committed an intentional tort because he breached fiduciary duties he owed to the trust and its…”
Leve v. Franklin Capital Corp., 148 F. App'x 3 (2d Cir. 2005).
Ward v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's of London, Subscribing to Certificate No. B1132HGBA15062712 (N.D. Cal. 2019).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.