Harrod v. McDaniels
| Decision Date | 10 March 1879 |
| Citation | 126 Mass. 413 |
| Parties | W. S. Harrod v. Walter H. McDaniels, administrator |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Middlesex. Contract against the administrator of Maria L. Nesmith, upon a promissory note, dated October 5, 1874, payable to the order of the plaintiff, one year after date, signed by George T. Comins, and indorsed, before delivery to the payee "M. L. Nesmith by Edward Hastings, attorney." Writ dated February 19, 1879. Trial in the Superior Court, before Wilkinson, J., who ordered a verdict for the defendant; and the plaintiff alleged exceptions, the material parts of which appear in the opinion.
Exceptions sustained.
D. S Richardson & J. F. McEvoy, for the plaintiff.
T. H Sweetser & G. A. A. Pevey, for the defendant.
OPINION
The name of Maria L. Nesmith, the defendant's intestate, was signed to the note in suit by Hastings acting as her attorney in October 1874. In May 1873, she had given Hastings a power of attorney to collect and invest her money, to give notes in her name, to sell and convey personal property and real estate, and to prosecute and defend suits; with full power to manage all her estate, real and personal, during her absence from the United States. In August 1874, she returned from Europe to her residence in Lowell, where she remained until her death in 1876.
Assuming that the authority given by the power of attorney continued only during the absence of the principal from the United States, the question remains, whether the evidence offered by the plaintiff to show original authority or a subsequent ratification of Hastings's act in signing the note ought to have been submitted to the jury.
It was admitted that due notice of the non-payment of the note in suit was given to the intestate, Maria L. Nesmith. See St. 1874, c. 404. The plaintiff offered to prove that in August 1875, with other creditors of Comins, the principal maker of the note in suit, who had then become bankrupt, she signed an agreement of composition under seal, and received a dividend on the note from the bankrupt estate, having been previously informed by Hastings that he had signed the same in her name under the power of attorney. He also offered to prove that, after her return in August, and before this note was given, other notes were signed by Hastings as the attorney of said Maria, with no other authority than he then possessed under the power, which were subsequently paid by her.
The plaintiff asked the court to rule that the agreement of composition was evidence of a ratification of the act of Hastings in signing the note; but the judge ruled otherwise held that there was no evidence for the jury; and instructed them to return a verdict for the defendant. To this the plaintiff...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Calkins v. Wire Hardware Co.
...that he ratified the agreement. Cushman v. Loker, 2 Mass. 106;Thayer v. White, 12 Metc. 343;Foster v. Rockwell, 104 Mass. 167;Harrod v. McDaniels, 126 Mass. 413;Lajoie v. Milliken, 242 Mass. 508, 526, 136 N. E. 419;BoicePerrine Co. v. Kelly, 243 Mass. 327, 330, 331, 137 N. E. 731. [23] The ......
-
Williams v. Bank
...question whether he assumed the signature as his own; but it was not conclusive. Greenfield Bank v. Crafts, 2 Allen, 269, 273; Harrod v. McDaniels, 126 Mass. 413." Traders' National Bank v. Rogers, 167 Mass. 315, 45 N. E. 923, 36 L R. A. 539, 543, 57 Am. St. Rep. 458. We speak solely of the......
-
Williams v. Atlanta Nat. Bank
... ... the signature as his own; but it was not conclusive ... Greenfield Bank v. Crafts, 2 Allen, 269, 273; Harrod ... v. McDaniels, 126 Mass. 413." Traders' National ... Bank v. Rogers, 167 Mass. 315, 45 N.E. 923, 36 L.R.A ... 539, 543, 57 Am.St.Rep. 458 ... ...
-
Boice-Perrine Co. v. Kelley
...or mitigated by immediate knowledge of the denial of responsibility by the principal. Foster v. Rockwell, 104 Mass. 167, 172;Harrod v. McDaniels, 126 Mass. 413, 415;Metcalf v. Williams, 144 Mass. 452, 11 N. E. 700;Albiani v. Evening Traveler Co., 220 Mass. 20, 25, 107 N. E. 406;Auringer v. ......