Dole Bros. v. Cosmopolitan Preserving Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract, against the first named defendant as principal, and the other defendants, Hiram N. Lathrop and J. B. Wentworth, as sureties, upon a bond given to dissolve the attachment. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Mason, C. J., who found for the defendant principal, and for the plaintiff as against the defendant sureties; and they alleged exceptions. The facts appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtKnowlton, J.
The defendants Lathrop and Wentworth are sued- as sureties upon a bond to dissolve an attachment. *482The instrument purports to be a bond of the Cosmopolitan Preserving Company as principal, and Lathrop and Wentworth as sureties, and to be signed and sealed by the principal by the hand of an agent. In fact, the agent had no authority to sign for the corporation, and the question is whether the sureties can be held on the bond.
It is well settled that, upon the face of the paper and the facts stated above, without more, they do not appear to be liable. Such an instrument is supposed to be signed…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Bean v. ParkerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1822
- Kelley v. Newburyport & Amesbury Horse RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1886
- Russell v. AnnableMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
- Murray v. C. N. Nelson Lumber Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- Wood v. BullardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Kidder v. GreenmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1933
- Beacon Trust Co. v. SoutherMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1903
- Shepard & Morse Lumber Co. v. EldridgeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
- Perkins v. RichMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1981
- Guaranty Trust Co. of New York v. KoehlerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1912
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.