Are traditional agency principles effective for Internet transactions, given the lack of personal interaction?

This document cites

• New York - Standard Builders Supplies v. Gush
• Federal Cases - Schaefer v. Telex, Inc.
• Federal Cases - Wells Fargo Business Credit v. Ben Kozloff, Inc.
• Federal Cases - Inset Systems, Inc. v. Instruction Set, Inc.
• New York - City of Cohoes v. Kestner Engineers P.C.



See all quotations

• Federal Cases - Cavic v. Grand Bahama Development Co., Ltd.
• Federal Cases - Drexel v. Union Prescription Centers, Inc.
• California - Beck v. Arthur Murray, Inc.
• New York - Small v. Housman
• Federal Cases - Gizzi v. Texaco, Inc.
• Arkansas - Boone v. General Shoe Corp., 4-9541
• New York - Scaccia v. Degener
• New York - Hoysradt v. Nilles Ford-Mercury, Inc., FORD-MERCUR
• New York - Empire Communications Consultants, Inc. v. Pay TV of Greater New York, Inc.
• Federal Cases - Kelly v. United States Steel Corporation, Civ. A. 17251.
• District of Columbia - Lewis v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
• Federal Cases - Clark & Wilson Lumber Co. v. McAllister
• Delaware - Singleton v. International Dairy Queen, Inc.
• Federal Cases - U.S. v. Feinberg, 94-3928
• Colorado - Baumgartner v. Burt
• Pennsylvania - Fidelman-Danziger, Inc. v. Statler Management, Inc., FIDELMAN-DANZIGE
• Washington - Smith v. Hansen, Hansen & Johnson, Inc.
• Delaware - Finnegan Const. Co. v. Robino-Ladd Co.
• Federal Cases - Cleveland Hair Clinic, Inc. v. Puig, 96 C 3560.
• Texas - Nicholson v. Memorial Hosp. System
• Federal Cases - Reagin v. Terry, Civ. No. C-84-470-G.
• Federal Cases - EF Hutton & Co. v. First Fla. Sec., Inc.
• Colorado - Rhodes v. Industrial Com'n
• Federal Cases - Zippo Mfg. Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, Inc.
• Michigan - Chajnacki v. Dougherty, 5.
• Federal Cases - Shaw v. Delta Airlines, Inc.
• New Jersey - Hoddeson v. Koos Bros.
• Federal Cases - Heroes, Inc. v. Heroes Foundation
• Federal Cases - Carr v. Runyan
• Federal Cases - MTV Networks v. Curry