Farmington Savings Bank v. Buzzell
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit upon a promissory note purporting to be signed by the defendants, and given to take up an older note signed by two of the defendants. There was no denial of the signatures under the 46th rule of court. The defendant Josie M. F. Buzzell, whose name was not upon the older note, pleaded coverture with the defendant Samuel H. Buzzell, and that the ¡Dromise was made in his behalf and as surety.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit upon a promissory note purporting to be signed by the defendants, and given to take up an older note signed by two of the defendants. There was no denial of the signatures under the 46th rule of court. The defendant Josie M. F. Buzzell, whose name was not upon the older note, pleaded coverture with the defendant Samuel H. Buzzell, and that the ¡Dromise was made in his behalf and as surety. Replication, denying that the promise was made as alleged, and issue upon that. The testimony tended to support the plea. The signature of Josie was written by her husband without her knowledge.…
1Opinion of the CourtAllen, J.
Special authority given by the defendant Josie Buzzell to her husband to sign her name to notes as surety for his benefit was not a general authority to sign for and bind her as principal. Whitehouse v. Hanson, 42 N. H. 9. The act of the husband in signing his wife’s name, so as to make it appear that she was bound as principal maker upon the note, was a usurpation of power which she had not conferred; and the contract of agency, which was special, and limited to an authority to sign as surety only, could not be enlarged in that way. There was no evidence that the defendant advertised or held…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Farmington National Bank v. BuzzellSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1880
- Merrill v. CarrSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1880