Broughton v. Silloway
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract for a refusal by the defendant to deliver to the plaintiff a deed of a parcel of land in Brighton, offered for sale by the defendant at an auction sale at which the plaintiff was the highest bidder.
Read the full summary
Contract for a refusal by the defendant to deliver to the plaintiff a deed of a parcel of land in Brighton, offered for sale by the defendant at an auction sale at which the plaintiff was the highest bidder. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Lord, J., it appeared that the plaintiff was the highest bidder at the auction, and that he signed the contract of sale; that the contract provided that $500 should be paid at the time of sale; that the plaintiff, after the sale, which was on Thursday in the afternoon, gave his check for $500 to the auctioneer, who gave a receipt therefor as for…
1Opinion of the CourtGray, C. J.
The terms of the contract of sale requiring $500 to be paid down, the auctioneer had no right, by virtue of his employment as such, and without express authority, to bind the defendant by accepting as cash a check drawn against a bank in which the drawer had at the time no funds. Sykes v. Giles, 5 M. & W. 645. Williams v. Evans, L. R. 1 Q. B. 352. Taylor v. Wilson, 11 Met. 44. Story on Agency, § 209.
There was no evidence in the case that the drawer had funds in the bank when the check was drawn, or that the defendant knew that the auctioneer had taken a check until the second day afterwards,…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Mescall v. Somerset Savings BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1940
- Muhlig v. FiskeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1881
- Scully v. DodgeSupreme Court of Kansas · 1888
- Hadley Milling Co. v. KelleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
- SIOUX CITY NURSERY & SEED CO. v. MAGNUS.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1891
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.