Home Table of Contents

WPI 50.02.01 Agent—Scope of Apparent Authority Defined

6 WAPRAC WPI 50.02.01Washington Practice Series TMWashington Pattern Jury Instructions--Civil

6 Wash. Prac., Wash. Pattern Jury Instr. Civ. WPI 50.02.01 (7th ed.)
Washington Practice Series TM
Washington Pattern Jury Instructions--Civil
April 2022 Update
Washington State Supreme Court Committee on Jury Instructions
Part VI. Agency and Partnership—Torts
Chapter 50. Agency and Partnership—Torts
WPI 50.02.01 Agent—Scope of Apparent Authority Defined
One of the issues for you to decide is whether(agent's name)was acting within the scope of apparent authority. Apparent authority may only be inferred from the words or conduct of(principal's name). Apparent authority cannot be inferred from the words or conduct of(agent's name).
To establish that(agent's name)was acting within the scope of apparent authority, the plaintiff has the burden of proving each of the following propositions:
First, that the words or conduct of(principal's name)conveyed to the plaintiff that(agent's name)had the authority to perform the particular act on(principal's name)'s behalf;
Second, that the words or conduct of(principal's name)actually led the plaintiff to believe that(agent's name)had the authority to so act; and
Third, that the words or conduct of(principal's name)would have led a reasonably careful person under the circumstances to believe that(agent's name)had the authority to so act.
NOTE ON USE
For the scope of this instruction, see WPI 50.00 (Introduction).
Use this instruction when there is an issue as to apparent authority. Use WPI 50.03 (Act of Agent is Act of Principal) with this instruction.
COMMENT
This instruction is derived from King v. Riveland, 125 Wn.2d 500, 507, 886 P.2d 160 (1994), and State v. French, 88 Wn.App. 586, 595–96, 945 P.2d 752 (1997). In order to make the instruction easier for jurors to understand, WPI 50.02.01 was drafted using “words and conduct” instead of the “obvious manifestations” terminology that is found in these cases. No change in meaning is intended with this simplified terminology.
An agent's apparent authority to bind a principal is determined based on the words or conduct of the principal toward a third party. King, 125 Wn.2d at 507; French, 88 Wn.App. at 595. In this respect, apparent authority differs from actual authority, which is determined based on the words or conduct of the principal toward the agent. See Comment to WPI 50.02 (Agent—Scope of Authority Defined).
Apparent authority may not be inferred from the acts of the agent. French, 88 Wn.App. at 595; Hansen v. Horn Rapids O.R.V. Park, 85 Wn.App. 424, 430, 932 P.2d 724 (1997).
Apparent authority involves both subjective and objective elements. The third party must actually believe, based on the principal's words or conduct, that the principal authorized the agent to act, and this belief must be reasonable. King, 125 Wn.2d at 507; French, 88 Wn.App. at 595–96; Hansen, 85 Wn.App. at 430.
[Current as of November 2021.]
End of Document