Denny v. Manhattan Co., 2 Denio 115 (1846). · Go Syfert
Search
Denny v. Manhattan Co., 2 Denio 115 (1846). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
21 citation events across 6 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Colvin v. Holbrook (nysupct, 1848-07-04)
Treatment trajectory · 1902 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1902 1964 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see, e.g." Colvin v. Holbrook
N.Y. Sup. Ct. · 1848 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Denny v. Manhattan Co. 2 Denio, 115.) There are some deputies or subordinate officers who are re sponsible for negligence personally, but in such cases the principal is not liable.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Denny and others, Trustees, &c.
v.
The Manhattan Company
Jan 15, 1846.
2 Denio 115
S. P. Staples S. Stevens, for the defendants,, S. A. Foot, for the plaintiffs
Published
Per Curiam.

We entertain a pretty strong impression that the plaintiffs have failed to show a good title to the stock: but our decision will be put upon another ground, concerning which we have had no doubt from the moment the case was opened. If the plaintiffs have a cause of action against any one, it is not against the defendants, but against the Planters’ Bank of Tennessee. The defendants were not the agent of the plaintiffs and owed them no duty. They were the agent of the Planters’ Bank; and for a neglect to discharge their agency, they are answerable to their principal and to no one else. If third persons are injured by the neglect of a known agent, the rule is respondeat superior, and generally the action must be brought against the principal.

Judgment for defendants.