73-75 Main Avenue, LLC v. PP Door Enterprise, Inc., 991 A.2d 650 (2010)

Citation: 73-75 Main Avenue, LLC v. PP Door Enterprise, Inc., 991 A.2d 650 (2010)
Parent Document: 73-75 Main Avenue, LLC v. PP Door Enterprise, Inc., 991 A.2d 650 (2010)
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (state)
Effective Date: 2010-03-30
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2273167/73-75-main-avenue-llc-v-pp-door... ↗

Full Text

1,015 chars

Subsequently, the plaintiff sent the lease and guarantee agreements to PP Door, and received the documents back with signatures, including the guarantee agreement that was meant for Li. After the initial lease payment, which included the first and last month’s rent and security deposit, each of the next five rent payments was by check from PP Door or its affiliate, PYML U.S.A., Inc., and all of the five checks were signed by Li. Contesting the liability of PP Door as to the lease, Li testified that Zhang needed her credit information so that he would be able to lease the building. On the basis of the foregoing evidence, we conclude that there was adequate evidence before the court on which it could have found that PP Door held Zhang out as possessing sufficient authority to sign the lease and that the plaintiff, acting in good faith, reasonably believed that Zhang had the necessary authority to bind PP Door. Thus, the court’s determination that apparent authority existed, was not clearly erroneous. m

Other Sections in This Document (71)

Full Text