Principal-agent Agreement and Tort Warranty Theories Assignment

Principal-agent Agreement and Tort Warranty Theories - Assignment Example The law implies certain responsibilities to the principal. Agents cannot avoid their duties and responsibilities that they have been assigned to by the principal by delegating or assigning to the other party. The relationship is highly personal by nature, and therefore non-delegable in that it cannot be performed by any other than the agent selected. An agent is supposed to obey all the lawful and reasonable instructions assigned to him by the principal in the performance of the agency. If losses occur to the principal due to an act committed by the agent acting more than its authority, the agent shall remain liable to those losses. In the relationship, the urgent is appointed by the principal and is working for the principal. Therefore agents must remain diligent, faithful, and loyal to their employers, and act in an ethical manner, and in the most professional way putting forth their best interests and efforts towards achieving their principal objectives. The agent must act with reasonable care and poses the skills required to perform such duties. Agents must have reasonable judgments in rendering the service and in advertisements. Agents hold themselves to the public as possessing skills and certain abilities and that have a duty to perform with full competence. In addition, agents cannot escape responsibility due to lack of ability, negligence or pleading ignorance, and therefore they should keep informed of legal developments, economic, and social developments in their fields of expertise Principals have several duties to the agents in their relationships such as fulfilling the obligations set forth in the agreements, paying the agents like indemnifying the agents for liabilities incurred in carrying out the agency duties and for reasonable expenses.

Rhetoric anlysis Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words - 2

Rhetoric anlysis - Essay Example rb indicates that Catton’s style does not emphasize on action images, but on descriptive images that aim to illustrate the paradox of being different, and yet being alike. Another example of atypical syntax is: â€Å"Daring and resourcefulness they had too† (paragraph 15). It is a typical because the predicate â€Å"Daring and resourcefulness† was put first before the subject â€Å"they.† The unique quality of writing emphasizes descriptions of the greatness of these two generals, and how they truly captured the diverse characters of the American identity. Catton focuses more on the backgrounds of the two generals and how they served as the metaphor of their people because they are more important than statistics and dates in representing the greatness of two people uniting for a great common cause. For instance, Catton says that â€Å"Lee†¦himself was the Confederacy† (paragraph 6) and Grant was â€Å"the Westerner† (paragraph 11). By making each general stand for the people they were fighting for, Catton successfully creates a patriotic tone that can unify Confederates and Union supporters because, if their generals, the epitome of who they are and what they stand for, can set aside their differences to attain common interests, then these two groups of people can also do the same. The single sentence in paragraph 3 provides the thesis of the essay. It argues that these two generals are truly different, but they must collide in order to pave a new direction for the country. The purpose of using a single sentence is to emphasize the thesis and to set the tone of writing and attitude of the speaker toward the values and ideals that Lee and Grant represent, individually and jointly. These coordinating conjunctions give special coherence to the paragraphs because they provide the signal posts for talking about differences or similarities between the two generals and the lives they represent. They also support the patriotic, conversational tone that Catton uses, so