Simonson v. International Bank of Washington
| Decision Date | 04 January 1963 |
| Docket Number | No. 17054.,17054. |
| Parties | Albert C. SIMONSON, Appellant, v. INTERNATIONAL BANK OF WASHINGTON, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit |
Mr. Raymond W. Bergan, Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Edward Bennett Williams, Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellant.
Mr. George F. Bason, Jr., Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Guy Martin, Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellee.
Before WILBUR K. MILLER, FAHY and WRIGHT, Circuit Judges.
This is an action ex contractu brought by Simonson against International Bank. The District Court held that the contract sued on was not under seal, and that therefore this action was barred because the three-year period of limitation had run. Simonson insists the contract was under seal and so was subject to the twelve-year period of limitation which has not expired.
The corporate seal of the International Bank was affixed but there was no other seal, and no recital or other indication that the execution of a sealed instrument was intended by the bank. In these circumstances, we hold the contract is not a sealed instrument. Sigler v. Mt. Vernon Bottling Co., 104 U.S.App.D.C. 260, 261 F.2d 378 (1958); Brown v. Commercial Fire Insurance Co., 21 App.D.C. 325, 336 (1903).
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
PRESIDENT AND DIRECTORS, ETC. v. Madden
...contends that the presence of the word "(Seal)" should be a sufficient "other indication," Simonson v. International Bank of Washington, 312 F.2d 887, 887 (D.C.Cir.1963) (per curiam), to render the contract sealed. Georgetown relies on the following language from Sigler v. Mount Vernon Bott......
-
Fox-Greenwald Sheet Metal Co. v. Markowitz Bros., Inc.
...genuineness, and the twelve-year limitation on the enforcement of sealed instruments does not apply. See Simonson v. International Bank, 114 U.S.App.D.C. 160, 312 F.2d 887 (1963); Sigler v. Mt. Vernon Bottling Co., 104 U.S.App.D.C. 260, 261-262, 261 F.2d 378, 379-380 (1958). Rather, the thr......
-
Kingston Housing Authority v. Sandonato & Bogue, Inc.
...authority of the signing officers and not as a manifestation of intent that the instrument is under seal. Simonson v. International Bank of Washington, 312 F.2d 887 (D.C.Cir.1963). President & Directors of Georgetown College v. Madden, 660 F.2d 91, 96 (4th Cir.1981). Blue Cross & Blue Shiel......
-
Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina v. Odell Associates, Inc., 8215SC412
...that the instrument would be under seal, or the words "corporate seal" or "affix corporate seal." Simonson v. International Bank of Washington, 312 F.2d 887 (D.C.Cir.1963) (per curiam ); Sigler v. Mt. Vernon Bottling Company, 261 F.2d 378 (D.C.Cir.1958) (per curiam Summary judgment in favor......