- 17 -
intention on his part, other than that he intended
approving and adopting it.'" * * *[Rakestraw v.
Rodrigues, 500 P.2d 1401] at 1405 [1972] (quoting
Ballard v. Nye, 138 Cal. 588, 597, 72 P. 156, 159
(1903)).
Mishawaka Properties v. Commissioner, supra at 364-365. We
further stated that:
The underlying concept of the implied ratification
principle is to reach the same result where the
person(s) with control over the authority allow others
to exercise it without repudiation. That principle is
no less appropriate or proper in the setting of
sections 6226 and 6231 than in sections 6212 and 6213.
Id. at 365. Although the holding in Mishawaka is not directly
relevant, the circumstances and rationale of that case are
comparable to those considered in this case.
To reflect the foregoing,
An appropriate order will be
issued granting respondent’s and
denying petitioner’s motion for
partial summary judgment.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Last modified: May 25, 2011