Which statement correctly describes express authority vs implied authority?

• A. Express authority is explicit permission; implied authority arises from the agent's role and necessary actions to fulfill express authority.
• B. Express authority arises from the agent's actions without consent; implied authority is explicit.
• C. Express authority is always broader than implied; implied is never tied to role.
• D. Express authority is optional; implied authority is suspended if express exists.

Answer: (A)

In agency law, express authority is explicit permission given by the principal to the agent to act on the principal’s behalf. This is the clear, stated authorization found in a contract, instruction, or other direct communication.

Implied authority, on the other hand, isn’t written or spoken. It comes from the agent’s role and from what’s reasonably necessary to carry out the express instructions, or from the usual line of business or course of dealing between the principal and agent. It allows the agent to take actions that are reasonably incidental to achieving the express mandate, or that the principal would expect the agent to take in order to manage the affairs entrusted to them.

So the correct statement reflects that express authority is explicit permission, while implied authority arises from the agent’s role and the actions necessary to fulfill the express authority.

The other descriptions miss the core relationships: express authority does not arise from the agent’s unilateral actions without the principal’s consent; implied authority is not explicit; express authority is not inherently broader than implied, and implied authority can be tied to the agent’s role. It’s also incorrect to claim express authority is optional or that implied authority is suspended if express exists—the two sources can coexist, with implied authority filling in what is reasonably needed to carry out the express mandate.