Whether one is liable for the malversation of those under his authority? - Complaint raised in name of another without his authority.
James Stewart v. Duncan Macdonald, Huch Chisholm, and George Bean
Date: 6 July 1784 Case No. No 81.
A creditor not responsible for the misconduct of an agent or messsnger in the execution diligence.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
James Stewart being apprehended by Hugh Chisholm, a messenger, for a debt due to Duncan Macdonald, consigned the money in the hands of the magistrate, to whom he was presented for incarceration, and was set at liberty. A few hours after, he was again apprehended, on the former diligence, by Hugh Chisholm, in consequence of directions from George Bean, the agent for Mr Macdonald, the creditor, and thrown into prison, where he lay for several days.
In an action of damages founded on these proceedings, the Lords pronounced the following interlocutor:
“Find, That the imprisonment after consignation was illegal and oppressive, and that George Bean the agent, and Hugh Chisholm the messenger, are conjunctly and severally liable in damages and expenses; but, in respect there is no evidence that the defender, Duncan Macdonald, was in any degree accessory to the imprisonment of the pursuer, therefore assoilzie him from the process.”
Lord Ordinary, Braxfield.Act. Solicitor-General Dundas, W. Miller.For the Creditor, Lord Advocate Campbell, G. Buchan-Hepburn.For the Agent and Messenger, Mackintosh, H. Erskine, Honyman.Clerk, Home.
Fol. Dic. v. 4. p. 231. Fac. Col. No 146. p. 261.
