July 13, 1989IN THE MATTER OF: ) J & R LANDFILL, INC., ) AC 89—78(St.
The
issue was whether the third person dealing with that agent couldhave reasonably believed that the agent had apparent authority tobind the principal, or whether the principal had ratified theagent’s unauthorized acts.
90 Ill.
App.
3d at ——, 413 N.E.2d at 464
(citation omitted).
Thus, had the facts indicated that the franchisee was the agent
of the franchisor, the court may have come to a differentresult. Adm. Code 101.141). In Illinois, service on a corporationis effective if on an actua...
Allowed
scantmp3
Adobe Portable Document Format (.pdf) - application/pdf
... 
