apparent agency


Also found in: Legal, Financial.

apparent agency

Ostensible agency Medical malpractice A relationship in which a person–eg, a physician, has a relationship of responsibility with an entity–eg, a hospital. See Captain of the ship doctrine, Malpractice.
McGraw-Hill Concise Dictionary of Modern Medicine. © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
References in periodicals archive ?
(372) Still, where the franchisee is insolvent, a plaintiff will have to prove traditional actual or apparent agency in order for the franchisor to be held vicariously liable.
(35) The court also eased the plaintiffs burden of proof in establishing a claim under the theory of apparent agency, specifically with regard to proving detrimental reliance.
1945) (recognizing there are two types of agency--actual and apparent); Angerosa, 290 N.Y.S.2d at 208-09 (acknowledging the existence of apparent agency authority); Smith v.
A victim injured by the criminal acts of third parties who cannot show the existence of excessive control can then assert that even if there is no actual agency, there is an apparent agency.
There are three facets to apparent agency, the court said--first, exertion of sufficient control over the party claimed to be an agent; second, a "holding out" of the party as an agent; and third, reasonable reliance by the third party on the principal's conduct.
The court granted the plaintiff's petition for review to resolve the question of when a nonnegligent person or entity may be held vicariously liable on an apparent agency theory for physical injuries negligently inflicted by a medical professorial.
It is interesting to note that Minnesota is one of the few states which fail to recognize the doctrine of apparent agency, which is also known as the doctrine of ostensible agency.
Courts around the country are holding hospitals and doctors vicariously liable for contractors' negligence under the theory of ostensible agency (also called apparent agency).
An apparent agency relationship exists if a principal (the accounting firm) creates the reasonable impression in a third party (the investors) that the agent (brother-in-law) has the authority to act on its behalf.
The court concluded that the Martiners were entitled to summary judgment on the issue of ostensible or apparent agency. However, the court remained confident that its conclusions as to all other issues were correct.
In addition to apparent agency, plaintiffs injured by the negligence of independent-contractor physicians may be able to hold hospitals vicariously liable under theories of nondelegable duty or joint venture.