Also known as: entrustment doctrine · doctrine of entrusting · entrustment
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
A tort doctrine imposing liability on a person who negligently supplies a dangerous instrumentality to another whom the supplier knows or should know is likely to use it in a manner creating unreasonable risk of harm.
A tort doctrine imposing liability on a person who negligently supplies a dangerous instrumentality to another whom the supplier knows or should know is likely to use it in a manner creating unreasonable risk of harm.
Dorothy Daniels allowed her sixteen-year-old son to drive the family car after he had been cited twice for speeding. The son lost control while racing a friend and injured a pedestrian. The pedestrian sued the parents. The court held the parents liable because their decision to entrust the vehicle to the minor constituted their own negligence that proximately caused the harm.
A rule under the Uniform Commercial Code providing that delivery of goods to a merchant who deals in goods of that kind gives the merchant power to transfer all rights of the entruster to a buyer in the ordinary course of business. Entrusting includes any delivery and any acquiescence in retention of possession regardless of conditions expressed between the parties.
DeWeldon Ltd. left several valuable paintings in the possession of its founder Felix DeWeldon. Felix sold two of the paintings to McKean, a buyer in the ordinary course of business who paid value without notice of any claim. McKean prevailed over DeWeldon Ltd. because the initial delivery to Felix constituted entrustment that empowered Felix to pass good title.
A rule under the Uniform Commercial Code providing that delivery of goods to a merchant who deals in goods of that kind gives the merchant power to transfer all rights of the entruster to a buyer in the ordinary course of business. Entrusting includes any delivery and any acquiescence in retention of possession regardless of conditions expressed between the parties.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
The doctrine operates automatically once goods are delivered to a merchant who deals in goods of that kind. It does not require proof of actual or apparent authority. A buyer in ordinary course therefore takes free of the original owner's claim even if the merchant had no right to sell.
Yes. The statute expressly states that entrusting includes any delivery regardless of whether the procurement of the entrusting was larcenous under criminal law. A buyer in ordinary course is therefore protected even if the merchant originally stole the goods.
The buyer must purchase in good faith, without knowledge that the sale violates a third party's ownership rights, and from a person in the business of selling goods of that kind. The buyer must also give value.