finding that the executive director of the Medford Housing Authority had implied and apparent authority to orally agree to modifications to a contract, notwithstanding a contract provision requiring all changes to be made pursuant to a written order of the Authority
How later courts described this case
- finding that the executive director of the Medford Housing Authority had implied and apparent authority to orally agree to modifications to a contract, notwithstanding a contract provision requiring all changes to be made pursuant to a written order of the Authority
- housing authority’s executive director was the only person who had been delegated the power to act and the only official of the authority with whom plaintiff dealt
- but with Whittemore, Spalding and Cutter, JJ., dissenting
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Weittemore, J.
(with Spalding, J., and Cutter, J.) dissenting. The evidence, we submit, does not support the conclusion that Palumbo had apparent or implied authority to modify the contract. In determining the authority of such an agent the rules for State and municipal contracts should be applied. On the facts, however, even under the rules applicable to a private corporation the Authority would not be bound by an attempt by Palumbo to change the contract. Furthermore, the evidence does not show that Palumbo attempted to modify the contract to permit the plaintiff to recover without a written change order.