Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Why can't implied authority conflict with any express authority? See Details.?
So I'm reading my textbook for Business Law II, and I first searched for the differences of Implied Authority and Expressed Authority. This is what I came up with:
Implied Authority: when the public assumes your authority because of certain attributes such as actions (signing contracts) or possessions (company t-shirt, vehicle).
Expressed Authority: Actual, distinctly stated (not implied), specific, authority given by a delegatee or principle to his or her delegate or agent, through oral or written, or partly oral & partly written words.
Now, this is what I'm thinking, Expressed Authority would be like if a sports icon has a contract with an agent to see and advise potential contracts. Implied Authority would be like if the sports icon's agent hires a secretary without permission from the sports icon.
I am so confused - the book states "Implied authority can not conflict with any express authority." I would like to know why - and maybe what they mean by "conflict". I read in other places online that Expressed Authority and Implied Authority can sometimes go hand in hand.
So what am I missing here?
(For the record, the chapter is discussing Agency Formation & Duties, Nothing specific like auto insurance but examples are greatly appreciated - Thank you~ !!)
Still confused, so what you're saying is that you can either have implied authority, or expressed authority, not both. I understand that much. So the conflict in your example is with the implied authority only, not the expressed authority. So what the book means is that implied authority conflicts will not go hand in hand with express authority conflicts?
I'm probably way-over thinking this which I have a tendency to do, I know it's not rocket science. I just think I'm having trouble understanding and just want to make sure I'm correct. Thank you
1 Answer
- divot IILv 78 years agoFavorite Answer
A literary agent has a written contract with John Grisham to negotiate with publishers. The agent has express authority to negotiate with publishers. A guy finds a John Grisham manuscript lying on a table in a restaurant where Grisham was eating. The guy runs across the street to Random House and says "I'm Grisham's Agent! I have his latest manuscript! I am authorized to sell it to you for a $250,000 check payable to me, today only!" He has implied authority because he does, indeed, have Grisham's manuscript. You work for Random House and recognize Grisham's style and are 100 percent certain that it is Grisham's manuscript. Do you cut the guy a check for $250K?
Source(s): Not rocket science. Add'l: "So the conflict in your example is with the implied authority only, not the expressed authority." JFC.. which part of: "A literary agent has a written contract with John Grisham to negotiate with publishers. The agent has express authority to negotiate with publishers."... do you not understand? When a guy wearing a blue shirt and pants tells you to strip and have sex with him because he is a police officer, do you just say "Yassuh mastah poh-leece orificer, front or back"? ...after all he has implied authority 'cuz he has at least part of what could be a police uniform. Don't over think this example... but be honest.
