Sherman v. Smith

The order was made on the ground, that the defendant had fraudulently procured the plaintiff’s indorsement. The representations claimed to be fraudulent, were made by the other defendant without the knowledge of the defendant on whose behalf the motion is made. But the defendants were partners at the time of the making of such representations, and they were professedly made on behalf of the firm and the indorsement which was procured by their means, was made on the obligation of the firm, and the film had the benefit of it in its business. The cases of the Hanover Co. agt. Sheldon (9 Abb.,…