1 Ala. 429 (Ala. 1840), Manning v. Norwood

Citation1 Ala. 429
Opinion JudgeORMOND, J.
Party NameMANNING & ADAMS v. NORWOOD.
AttorneyHOPKINS, for the plaintiff in error.
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

Page 429

1 Ala. 429 (Ala. 1840)

MANNING & ADAMS

v.

NORWOOD.

Supreme Court of Alabama

June Term, 1840

Error to the County Court of Jackson County.

DEBT on writing obligatory for eight hundred dollars, by the plaintiffs in error, against the defendant in error.

The defendant Patillo, failing to appear and plead, a judgment by default, was rendered against him. Norwood appeared, and pleaded to the declaration:

First--After craving oyer of the bond sued on, which was set forth, "that the said supposed writing obligatory, is not his deed, for the purpose therein specified, and of this he puts himself upon the country"--appended to the plea, is an affidavit of its truth:

Second--After craving oyer, "the said Henry Norwood says, that the said supposed writing obligatory, if ever signed by him, was signed in blank, and for a totally different object, and for a sum of money, if any at all was to be secured thereby, for a less amount, and a different purpose, than the plaintiffs have alleged, and of this he puts himself upon the country," &c.-- annexed to the plea is the following affidavit:

ALABAMA, JACKSON COUNTY--

"Personally appeared before me, Moses James Clerk, of the county court of Jackson county, in open court, Henry Norwood, who, after being duly sworn, says, that the instrument sued on in this case, if executed by him at all, was executed in blank, and was not to be filled up for a greater sum, than about four hundred dollars, to be given for goods, in Nashville, Tennessee; and by him handed to his co-obligor to be filled up by him, for that sum and for that purpose alone; otherwise, the same was to be considered as a nullity, and to be returned to him; which event did not happen, and wherefore it is not his deed."

The plaintiffs took issue on the first plea, and demurred to the second; which demurrer was overruled by the court--and the issue being found for the defendant, Norwood, judgment was rendered in his favor.

During the trial a bill of exceptions was taken, from which it appears, that the plaintiffs having proved the signature of Norwood to be genuine, except the seal, which was proved not to be in his hand writing, nor any proof, that he authorized any one to make or affix the scroll to his name; and the defendant Norwood having proved, that if he executed the bond sued on, it was done by signing a blank piece of paper, for the purpose of being filled up in Nashville, Tennessee, in favor of Douglass, Wood & Co. for the sum of four hundred dollars, payable twelve...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • 28 Wis. 33 (Wis. 1871), Etta v. Evenson
    • United States
    • Wisconsin United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • Invalid date
    ...J., 250; Gilbert v. Anthony, 1 Yerg. 69; Graham v. Holt, 3 Iredell 300; Woodworth v. Bank of America, 19 Johns. 391; Manning v. Norwood, 1 Ala. 429; Shepherd's Touchstone, 54. Gregory & Pinney for respondent: Where one affixes his signature to a blank form, or to an instrument in which ......
  • 19 Ala. 114 (Ala. 1851), Arrington v. Burton
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court of Alabama
    • Invalid date
    ...so as to bind a person who has signed his name simply to the blank without special authority to do so.--Manning & Adams v. Norwood, 1 Ala. 429; 2 Brock, 64; 17 S. & R. 438; 6 G. & J. 250; 7 Black. 413; 6 M. & W. 2. One authorized to fill up a blank is a special and limited a......
2 cases
  • 28 Wis. 33 (Wis. 1871), Etta v. Evenson
    • United States
    • Wisconsin United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • Invalid date
    ...J., 250; Gilbert v. Anthony, 1 Yerg. 69; Graham v. Holt, 3 Iredell 300; Woodworth v. Bank of America, 19 Johns. 391; Manning v. Norwood, 1 Ala. 429; Shepherd's Touchstone, 54. Gregory & Pinney for respondent: Where one affixes his signature to a blank form, or to an instrument in which ......
  • 19 Ala. 114 (Ala. 1851), Arrington v. Burton
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court of Alabama
    • Invalid date
    ...so as to bind a person who has signed his name simply to the blank without special authority to do so.--Manning & Adams v. Norwood, 1 Ala. 429; 2 Brock, 64; 17 S. & R. 438; 6 G. & J. 250; 7 Black. 413; 6 M. & W. 2. One authorized to fill up a blank is a special and limited a......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT