Cited by

Anderson v. Kerr, 51 Minn. 417, 420-21 , 53 N.W.

Anderson v. Kerr, 51 Minn. 417, 420 , 53 N.W.

Smitz v. Leopold, 51 Minn. 455 , ; Crump v. Ingersoll, 44 Minn. 84 , ; Kingsley v. Wheeler, 95 Minn. 360 , ; Goodhue Farmers’ Warehouse Co. v. Davis, 81 Minn. 210 , ; Snell v. Goodlander, 90 Minn. 533 , ; City of Minneapolis v. Canterbury, 122 Minn. 301 , , 48 L.R.A.(N.S.)

Smitz v. Leopold, 51 Minn. 455 , .

Tilleny v. Wolverton, 46 Minn. 256 , ; Smitz v. Leopold, 51 Minn. 455 , ; Goodhue F. W. Co. v. Davis, 81 Minn. 210 , ; Snell v. Goodlander, 90 Minn. 533 , ; Farmers W. Assn. v. Montgomery, 92 Minn. 194 , ; Schick v. Suttle, 94 Minn. 135 , ; Kimberly v. Arms, 129 U. S. 512 , 9 *426 S. Ct. 355, 32 L. ed. 764; Maas v. Lonstorf (C. C. A.) 1

“An agent to sell cannot purchase of himself without his principal’s consent, and, if he does, the principal may repudiate; and if the property has passed into the hands of an innocent purchaser, from whom it cannot be recovered, the principal is entitled to the proceeds or their value.” Smitz v. Leopold, 51 Minn. 455, 459 , .

Smitz v. Leopold, 51 Minn. 455 , ; Kingsley v. Wheeler, 95 Minn. 360 , ; Remple v. Hopkins, 101 Minn. 3 , ; Christianson v. Mille Lacs Land & Loan Co. 113 Minn. 120 , , 31 L.R.A.

Tinkcom v. Lewis, 21 Minn. 132 ; Cuilerier v. Brunelle, 37 Minn. 71 , ; State v. Kerr, 51 Minn. 417 , ; Bartleson v. Munson, 105 Minn. 348

State v. Kerr, 51 Minn. 417 , ; Johnson v. Northwestern L. & B. Assn. 60 Minn. 393 , .

Hoover v. Johnson, 47 Minn. 434 , ; State v. Kerr, 51 Minn. 417 , ; Bartleson v. Munson, 105 Minn. 348 , .

the agreement for a division of defendant’s commission, and nothing, therefore, passed by his assignment of the contract to plaintiff ; in other words, that the evidence conclusively shows that Hunter was secretly attempting to obtain a commission or profit from both parties while acting as the agent of each; — citing Webb v. Paxton, 36 Minn. 532 , , Smitz v. Leopold, 51 Minn. 455 , , Merriam v. Johnson, 86 Minn. 61 , , and other similar cases.

Kingsley v. Wheeler, 95 Minn. 360 , ; Smitz v. Leopold, 51 Minn. 455 , ; Dobson v. Racey, 8 N. Y. 216 ; Stewart v. Mather, 32 Wis.

Tiffany, Ag., 414; Holmes v. Cathcart, 88 Minn. 213 , ; Merriam v. Johnson, 86 Minn. 61 , ; Hegenmyer v. Marks, 37 Minn. 6 , ; Smitz v. Leopold, 51 Minn. 455, 456 , ; Donnelly v. Cunningham, 58 Minn. 376 , ; Snell v. Goodlander, 90 Minn. 533 , .

Smitz v. Leopold, 51 Minn. 455 , ; Goodhue Farmers’ Warehouse Co. v. Davis, 81 Minn. 210 , .

Snell v. Goodlander, 90 Minn. 533 , ; Smitz v. Leopold, 51 Minn. 455 , ; Hobart v. Sherburne, 66 Minn. 171 , ; Holmes v. Cathcart, 88 Minn. 213 , .

§ 469; Kraemer v. Deustermann 37 Minn. 469 , ; Smitz v. Leopold, 51 Minn. 455 , .

Hegenmyer v. Marks, 37 Minn. 6 , ; Smitz v. Leopold, 51 Minn. 455 , ; Crump v. Ingersoll, 47 Minn. 179 , ; Donnelly v. Cunningham, 58 Minn. 376 , .

It may be conceded that it had not, yet tbe agent cannot, while engaged in tbe service of bis employer or principal, act in tbe capacity of both buyer and purchaser, without such principal’s consent; and, as stated by this court (MITCHELL, J.) in Smitz v. Leopold, 51 Minn. 455 , , in such cases “all profits made in the course oí an agency belong to tbe principal, whether they are the fruits of tbe performance or of tbe violation of the agent’s duty.” This is tbe general doctrine, and does not se