# Horan v. Hughes

> District Court, S.D. New York · May 15, 1903 · 129 F. 248

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8754140

## Case

- **Full name:** HORAN v. HUGHES
- **Court:** District Court, S.D. New York
- **Decided:** May 15, 1903
- **Citations:** 129 F. 248; 1903 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Holt
- **Judges:** Holt
- **Cited by:** 14 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8754140

## Opinion text

HOLT, District Judge.
Hughes made the contract with Horan. He is therefore presumably responsible on it. His defense is, in substance, that he was acting as agent for a principal. To maintain such a defense, he must prove that he disclosed the name of his principal. It is not sufficient that he was acting as agent, or that the other party to the contract supposed he was acting as agent, if he did not know who the principal was. De Remer v. Brown, 165 N. Y. 419 , 59 N. E. 129 ; Tew v. Wolfsohn (Court of Appeals) 66 N. E. 934 . The evidence in this case, in my opinion, preponderates that Hughes either chartered Horan’s boat himself, or that, if Horan supposed Hughes was acting as agent, he did not know who Hughes’ principal was.
There should be a decree for the libelant for the amount demanded in the libel, with costs.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8754140. Public record. Not legal advice.