Springer was a political candidate running for Congress. He was operating on a tight budget and instructed his campaign staff no
t to purchase any cam- paign materials without his explicit authorization. In spite of these instructions, one of his campaign workers ordered Dubychek Printing Co. to print some promotional materials for Springer%u2019s campaign. When the printed materials arrived,Springer did not return them but instead used them during his campaign. When Springer failed to pay for the materials, Dubychek sued for recovery of the price. Springer contended that he was not liable on the sales contract because he had not authorized his agent to purchase the printing services. Dubychek argued that the campaign worker was Springer%u2019s agent and that the worker had authority to make the print-ing contract. Additionally, Dubychek claimed that even if the purchase was unauthorized, Springer%u2019s use of the materials constituted rati%uFB01cation of his agent%u2019s unauthorized purchase. Is Dubychek correct?
In the event that a purchase was made for a campaign without it being managed by the staff in charge of this management, with a proposal not to pay because the person who bought it was not this staff but the candidate, the selling company, Dubychek , is in everything correct when alleging the payment, the candidate knew of the situation and it is known that the representative, goes in the name of this candidate.
