ratification is invoked doctrine (Texas) · Go Syfert
← Texas issues

ratification is invoked doctrine in Texas

6 Texas opinions name it 1 courts 1952–2023 2 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Texas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (4)

CaseFollowedCited
Dillingham v. Russellgreen
tex · 1889 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2022–2023
2 sentences

2023Ratification “is but an agreement, express or implied, by one to be bound by the act of another performed for him.” Id. (quoting Dillingham v. Anthony, 11 S.W. 139, 142 (Tex. 1889)); see Rhodes, Inc. v. Duncan, 623 S.W.2d 741, 744 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1981, no writ) (“There can be no ratification of an act which is not done in behalf of, and does not purport to bind, the person against whom the doctrine of ratification is invoked.”).

2022Ratification “is but an agreement, express or implied, by one to be bound by the act of another performed for him.” Id. (quoting Dillingham v. Anthony, 11 S.W. 139, 142 (Tex. 1889)); see Enserch Corp. v. Rebich, 925 S.W.2d 75, 84 (Tex. App.—Tyler 1996, writ dism’d by agr.) (“[R]atification is reserved for the adoption of acts done only on behalf of the alleged ratifier.”); Rhodes, Inc. v. Duncan, 623 S.W.2d 741, 744 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1981, no writ) (“There can be no ratification of an act which is not done in behalf of, and does not purport to bind, the person against whom the doc

22
Rhodes, Inc. v. Duncangreen
texapp · 1981 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2022–2023
2 sentences

2023Ratification “is but an agreement, express or implied, by one to be bound by the act of another performed for him.” Id. (quoting Dillingham v. Anthony, 11 S.W. 139, 142 (Tex. 1889)); see Rhodes, Inc. v. Duncan, 623 S.W.2d 741, 744 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1981, no writ) (“There can be no ratification of an act which is not done in behalf of, and does not purport to bind, the person against whom the doctrine of ratification is invoked.”).

2022Ratification “is but an agreement, express or implied, by one to be bound by the act of another performed for him.” Id. (quoting Dillingham v. Anthony, 11 S.W. 139, 142 (Tex. 1889)); see Enserch Corp. v. Rebich, 925 S.W.2d 75, 84 (Tex. App.—Tyler 1996, writ dism’d by agr.) (“[R]atification is reserved for the adoption of acts done only on behalf of the alleged ratifier.”); Rhodes, Inc. v. Duncan, 623 S.W.2d 741, 744 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1981, no writ) (“There can be no ratification of an act which is not done in behalf of, and does not purport to bind, the person against whom the doc

22
Enserch Corp. v. Rebichgreen
texapp · 1996 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022
1 sentence

2022Ratification “is but an agreement, express or implied, by one to be bound by the act of another performed for him.” Id. (quoting Dillingham v. Anthony, 11 S.W. 139, 142 (Tex. 1889)); see Enserch Corp. v. Rebich, 925 S.W.2d 75, 84 (Tex. App.—Tyler 1996, writ dism’d by agr.) (“[R]atification is reserved for the adoption of acts done only on behalf of the alleged ratifier.”); Rhodes, Inc. v. Duncan, 623 S.W.2d 741, 744 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1981, no writ) (“There can be no ratification of an act which is not done in behalf of, and does not purport to bind, the person against whom the doc

11
O'Connor v. Campgreen
texapp · 1913 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1952–1952
1 sentence

1952In O’Connor v. Camp, Tex.Civ.App., 158 S.W. 203, 205 (Writ Ref.), the court said: “To make a valid ratification of a contract by another party, the contract must purport to.be in.the name of or for the person ratifying. [Commercial & Agricultural] Bank v. Jones, 18 Tex. 811 ; Moore v. Powell, 6 Tex.Civ.App. 43 , 25 S.W. 472 .” In Valaske v. Wirtz, 6 Cir., 106 F.2d 450, 451 , 124 A.L.R. 889, 892 , the Circuit Court of Appeals said : “It is well established in the law of agency that an unauthorized act can be ratified only when the act done was accompanied by a profession that it was done as the

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
Herider Farms-El Paso, Inc. v. Criswell green
texapp · 1975
2 sentences

1993That case held that "there can be no ratification of an act which is not done on behalf of, and does not purport to bind, the person against whom the doctrine of ratification is invoked." Herider, 519 S.W.2d at 477 .

1993That case held that “there can be no ratification of an act which is not done on behalf of, and does not purport to bind, the person against whom the doctrine of ratification is invoked.” Herider, 519 S.W.2d at 477 ..

31981–1993
Bpx Operating Company, Bpx Properties (Na) Lp, Segundo Navarro Drilling, Ltd., First Rock I, LLC, Ef Non-Op, LLC, and South Texas Shale, Llc v. Margaret Ann Strickhausen green
tex · 2021
1 sentence

2023Ratification “is but an agreement, express or implied, by one to be bound by the act of another performed for him.” Id. (quoting Dillingham v. Anthony, 11 S.W. 139, 142 (Tex. 1889)); see Rhodes, Inc. v. Duncan, 623 S.W.2d 741, 744 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1981, no writ) (“There can be no ratification of an act which is not done in behalf of, and does not purport to bind, the person against whom the doctrine of ratification is invoked.”).

12023–2023
Wise v. Pena green
texapp · 1977
1 sentence

2022Ratification “is but an agreement, express or implied, by one to be bound by the act of another performed for him.” Id. (quoting Dillingham v. Anthony, 11 S.W. 139, 142 (Tex. 1889)); see Enserch Corp. v. Rebich, 925 S.W.2d 75, 84 (Tex. App.—Tyler 1996, writ dism’d by agr.) (“[R]atification is reserved for the adoption of acts done only on behalf of the alleged ratifier.”); Rhodes, Inc. v. Duncan, 623 S.W.2d 741, 744 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1981, no writ) (“There can be no ratification of an act which is not done in behalf of, and does not purport to bind, the person against whom the doc

12022–2022
Commercial & Agricultural Bank v. Jones green
tex · 1857
1 sentence

1952In O’Connor v. Camp, Tex.Civ.App., 158 S.W. 203, 205 (Writ Ref.), the court said: “To make a valid ratification of a contract by another party, the contract must purport to.be in.the name of or for the person ratifying. [Commercial & Agricultural] Bank v. Jones, 18 Tex. 811 ; Moore v. Powell, 6 Tex.Civ.App. 43 , 25 S.W. 472 .” In Valaske v. Wirtz, 6 Cir., 106 F.2d 450, 451 , 124 A.L.R. 889, 892 , the Circuit Court of Appeals said : “It is well established in the law of agency that an unauthorized act can be ratified only when the act done was accompanied by a profession that it was done as the

11952–1952
Moore v. Powell green
texapp · 1894
2 sentences

1952In O’Connor v. Camp, Tex.Civ.App., 158 S.W. 203, 205 (Writ Ref.), the court said: “To make a valid ratification of a contract by another party, the contract must purport to.be in.the name of or for the person ratifying. [Commercial & Agricultural] Bank v. Jones, 18 Tex. 811 ; Moore v. Powell, 6 Tex.Civ.App. 43 , 25 S.W. 472 .” In Valaske v. Wirtz, 6 Cir., 106 F.2d 450, 451 , 124 A.L.R. 889, 892 , the Circuit Court of Appeals said : “It is well established in the law of agency that an unauthorized act can be ratified only when the act done was accompanied by a profession that it was done as the

1952In O’Connor v. Camp, Tex.Civ.App., 158 S.W. 203, 205 (Writ Ref.), the court said: “To make a valid ratification of a contract by another party, the contract must purport to.be in.the name of or for the person ratifying. [Commercial & Agricultural] Bank v. Jones, 18 Tex. 811 ; Moore v. Powell, 6 Tex.Civ.App. 43 , 25 S.W. 472 .” In Valaske v. Wirtz, 6 Cir., 106 F.2d 450, 451 , 124 A.L.R. 889, 892 , the Circuit Court of Appeals said : “It is well established in the law of agency that an unauthorized act can be ratified only when the act done was accompanied by a profession that it was done as the

11952–1952
Valaske v. Wirtz neutral
ca6 · 1939
2 sentences

1952In O’Connor v. Camp, Tex.Civ.App., 158 S.W. 203, 205 (Writ Ref.), the court said: “To make a valid ratification of a contract by another party, the contract must purport to.be in.the name of or for the person ratifying. [Commercial & Agricultural] Bank v. Jones, 18 Tex. 811 ; Moore v. Powell, 6 Tex.Civ.App. 43 , 25 S.W. 472 .” In Valaske v. Wirtz, 6 Cir., 106 F.2d 450, 451 , 124 A.L.R. 889, 892 , the Circuit Court of Appeals said : “It is well established in the law of agency that an unauthorized act can be ratified only when the act done was accompanied by a profession that it was done as the

1952In O’Connor v. Camp, Tex.Civ.App., 158 S.W. 203, 205 (Writ Ref.), the court said: “To make a valid ratification of a contract by another party, the contract must purport to.be in.the name of or for the person ratifying. [Commercial & Agricultural] Bank v. Jones, 18 Tex. 811 ; Moore v. Powell, 6 Tex.Civ.App. 43 , 25 S.W. 472 .” In Valaske v. Wirtz, 6 Cir., 106 F.2d 450, 451 , 124 A.L.R. 889, 892 , the Circuit Court of Appeals said : “It is well established in the law of agency that an unauthorized act can be ratified only when the act done was accompanied by a profession that it was done as the

11952–1952

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check