Miriam issued two checks. The first check was made payable to her neighbor for a used
car that the neighbor sold to Miriam. The second check was a rent payment to Miriam’s
landlord for the current month’s rent.The car was purchased on the basis of the
neighbor’s written assurance that the car had only 38,000 miles of use. After Miriam
took possession of the car, Miriam’s mechanic checked the vehicle and substantiated
that the odometer had been turned back. The car had actually been used for 79,000
miles. Miriam stopped payment on the check and offered to return the car. Meanwhile,
the neighbor had purchased a computer and had negotiated Miriam’s check to the
vendor in payment. Discouraged by the problems with the car, Miriam decided to take a
vacation. She issued a written stop payment to her bank on the rent check because she
intended to use this money for the vacation. Although the drawee bank had ample time
to act, it made an error and paid the rent check instead of stopping payment. Two
lawsuits resulted. In the first, the vendor of the computer sued Miriam on the check. In
the second, Miriam sued her bank for paying over her timely stop payment order.
Decide both cases.
If the negligence of the franchisee causes harm to a third person, the franchisor is not
liable because the franchisee is an independent contractor.
For a principal to ratify the actions of an agent, all that is necessary is that the principal
express the intention to ratify.