Opinion ID: 2773045
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Ella Dean Hunter

Text: ¶ 37 Ms. Hunter argues that she always believed there was a financial company backing her investment. Ms. Hunter seeks to hold HTK liable, under the theory of apparent authority, based primarily on a business card that was given to her by Mr. Campbell. The district court found that there was ―no evidence that [Ms.] Hunter relied on any actions or manifestations of HTK regarding Mr. Campbell‘s alleged authority to sell investments in BHDC.‖ The district court further found that there was ―no evidence‖ that Ms. Hunter ―relied on the manifestations of HTK in making her decision to invest in BHDC.‖ ¶ 38 Ms. Hunter never purchased any investment products from Mr. Campbell while he was a registered representative of HTK. Instead, Ms. Hunter had a previous investment through Pacific Life that she purchased from Mr. Campbell while he was associated with a previous broker-dealer. Her next investment with Mr. Campbell came after his termination from HTK, in April 2003, when she purchased BHDC notes. In order for there to be a manifestation of authority, ―the principal . . . must cause third parties to believe that the agent is clothed with apparent authority.‖32 The business card, alone, is not sufficient to constitute a manifestation of authority.33 Without a manifestation 31No. CV 92-12881 LGB (BX), 1993 WL 169191, at  (C.D. Cal. Mar. 30, 1993). 32 City Elec., 672 P.2d at 90. 33 See Long v. Aronov Realty Mgmt., Inc., 645 F. Supp. 2d 1008, 1034 n.57 (M.D. Ala. 2009) (―[I]t is also common knowledge that business cards are easy to acquire or improperly used, and that a third party‘s reliance on the agent‘s authority to act should be based on something other than just a business card.‖); CSX Transp., Inc. v. Recovery Express, Inc., 415 F. Supp. 2d 6, 11 (D. Mass. 2006) (explaining that the court ―could find no cases where . . . giving someone a business card with the company 20 Cite as: 2015 UT 8 Opinion of the Court of authority traceable to HTK, there can be no apparent authority as applied to Ms. Hunter. We therefore uphold the district court‘s grant of summary judgment in favor of HTK on Ms. Hunter‘s claims based on apparent authority.