Dennegar Liability Presentation
Published on Aug 02, 2020
No Description
MORE DECKS TO EXPLORE
PRESENTATION OUTLINE
Dennegar Liability
By: Mike Fortunato
Week 4 Individual Assignment: Dennegar Liability Presentation using Haiku Deck
Michael Fortunato
New England Institute of Business at Cambridge College
MBA 530 – Legal and Ethical Dimensions of Strategic Management
Photo by Mike Kniec
Summary
Lee Dennedar's Problem
The plaintiff Lee Dennegar is currently being held responsible for paying AT&T Universal $14,752.93, due to a credit card that was opened in his name. Dennegar claims to be the victim of identity theft due to an alleged third party opening the account in his name. Mark Knutson, a long time roommate of Dennegar, was reportedly put in charge by Dennegar to manage financial affairs for Dennegar. Despite Dennegar allowing Knutson to manage the financial affairs, there was no legal agreement or contract in place proving so.
Photo by CreditDebitPro
Facts
- AT&T Universal issued a credit card to the defendant Lee Dennegar sometime in early February, 2001.
- • Dennagar claims to have no knowledge of the credit card account.
- Mark Knutson died on June, 22nd 2003.
• AT&T Universal issued a credit card to the defendant Lee Dennegar sometime in early February, 2001.
• Dennegar allowed Knutson to manage their household's financial affairs and the “general office functions concerned with maintaining the house” (Fisher, n.d.).
• Mark Knutson died on June, 22nd 2003.
• Dennegar acknowledged that some of the charges were made to the credit card were authorized by the defendant to handle the household affairs.
• Monthly statements were sent to the house of which some were paid.
• $14,752.93 was due and owing when the debt was eventually assigned to plaintiff New Century Financial Services, Inc.
• Dennagar claims to have no knowledge of the credit card account.
• Despite Dennegar allowing Knutson to manage the financial affairs, there was no legal agreement or contract in place proving so.
• Dennegar allowed Knutson to manage their household's financial affairs and the “general office functions concerned with maintaining the house” (Fisher, n.d.).
• Mark Knutson died on June, 22nd 2003.
• Dennegar acknowledged that some of the charges were made to the credit card were authorized by the defendant to handle the household affairs.
• Monthly statements were sent to the house of which some were paid.
• $14,752.93 was due and owing when the debt was eventually assigned to plaintiff New Century Financial Services, Inc.
• Dennagar claims to have no knowledge of the credit card account.
• Despite Dennegar allowing Knutson to manage the financial affairs, there was no legal agreement or contract in place proving so.
Facts
- Dennegar allowed Knutson to manage their household's financial affairs and the “general office functions concerned with maintaining the house” (Fisher, n.d.).
- Dennegar acknowledged that some of the charges were made to the credit card were authorized by the defendant to handle the household affairs.
- Monthly statements were sent to the house of which some were paid.
• AT&T Universal issued a credit card to the defendant Lee Dennegar sometime in early February, 2001.
• Dennegar allowed Knutson to manage their household's financial affairs and the “general office functions concerned with maintaining the house” (Fisher, n.d.).
• Mark Knutson died on June, 22nd 2003.
• Dennegar acknowledged that some of the charges were made to the credit card were authorized by the defendant to handle the household affairs.
• Monthly statements were sent to the house of which some were paid.
• $14,752.93 was due and owing when the debt was eventually assigned to plaintiff New Century Financial Services, Inc.
• Dennagar claims to have no knowledge of the credit card account.
• Despite Dennegar allowing Knutson to manage the financial affairs, there was no legal agreement or contract in place proving so.
• Dennegar allowed Knutson to manage their household's financial affairs and the “general office functions concerned with maintaining the house” (Fisher, n.d.).
• Mark Knutson died on June, 22nd 2003.
• Dennegar acknowledged that some of the charges were made to the credit card were authorized by the defendant to handle the household affairs.
• Monthly statements were sent to the house of which some were paid.
• $14,752.93 was due and owing when the debt was eventually assigned to plaintiff New Century Financial Services, Inc.
• Dennagar claims to have no knowledge of the credit card account.
• Despite Dennegar allowing Knutson to manage the financial affairs, there was no legal agreement or contract in place proving so.
Agency Law
Here, we are looking at Agency law which is a relationship between an agent and principal in which the agent works solely on the behalf of the principal (Kuehnle, 1989). There are several types of agents including special agent, servant agent, and a general agent. Each is unique, yet similar in some ways. The general agent acts with the authority to perform multiple transactions in the name of the principal. The special agent is ordered to perform a certain transaction assigned to them. A servant agent is under control of the principal or master, and has been told what to do and how to do it.
Photo by Claire Anderson
Agencies
Agencies typically operate under contract but in this case, Mr. Dennegar was the principal and Mark was considered the agent. Their oral agreement was an implied agency. An implied agency in is an agency that has been formed based on the conduct of the principal (or client) and the agent (Collins, 2013). Mr. Dennagar was completely aware of Mark being allowed to take care of the household financial affairs. This left him under the impression that Mark was operating to benefit their livelihood.
Photo by Catalin Budusan
factors & Authority
Once it has been determined that there is an underlying tort or contract, however, the initial step of any agency analysis must be to inquire if an agency relationship exists between the tortfeasor or person who entered into the contractual relationship and the putative principal (Wyse, 1979). In this case there was no tort or contract other than an alleged oral agreement. Authority is when the principal is liable for an agents dealing with third parties and operates under implied or express authority. Authority typically allows the agent to legally act on behalf of the principal which could affect the principal's rights legally. In this instance Dennegar knowingly allowed Knutson to take control of finances and all aspects of Dennegar’s well-being. Unless there was a contract in place, Dennegar should have known he was still legally responsible for checking his own records.
Photo by georgina hibberd
Conclusion
In the end, Dennagar is responsible for the debt incurred on the credit card in his name. The bills were sent to his house, and some of them were paid from that address. We are all responsible for our finances, unless we have a professional looking after them under contract. While the oral agreement could be seen by some as legally binding, we don’t know the exact arrangement between Knutson and Dennagar. And now that Knutson is deceased, there is no way to prove otherwise. As stated during the trial “the cardholder’s failure to examine credit card statements that would reveal fraudulent use of the card constitutes a negligent omission that creates apparent authority for charges that would otherwise be considered unauthorized under the TILA (Fisher, n.d). Lee Dennegar is left with this debt weather he knew about it or not.
Photo by benjaflynn
References
- Collins, T., (2013) Implied Agency in Contracts. Duke University. Retrieved from https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6076&context=f...
- FISHER, J.A.D. (n.d.). NEW CENTURY FINANCIAL SERVICES INC v. DENNEGAR. Retrieved from http://caselaw.findlaw.com/nj-superior-court-appellate-division/1263011.htm...
- Kuehnle, W., (1989). Secondary Liability under the Federal Securities Laws - Aiding and Abetting, Conspiracy, Controlling Person, and Agency. Common-Law Principles and the Statutory Scheme.14J. Corp. L. 313. Retrieved from https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/jcorl14&div=20&...
- Mayer, et al., (2017) Business Law and the Legal Environment, v. 2.0. Flat World knowledge. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?id=B4BuLpk-20charges%3F&f=false
- Wyse, R. (1979). A Framework of Analysis for the Law of Agency, 40 Mont. L. Rev. Retrieved from https://scholarship.law.umt.edu/mlr/vol40/iss1/2
