Harwood's Executors v. Humes
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to Sumter County Court. Assumpsit by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error. The defendant pleaded the general issue, and two special pleas, as follows: and. for further plea, &c. &c., because they say, that at the time their testator signed the promissory note, in the plaintiff’s declaration mentioned, he, with others, whose names are thereto signed, for a long time before had been, and then were, trustees, and agents of the Methodist Episcopal Church…
Read the full summary
Error to Sumter County Court. Assumpsit by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error. The defendant pleaded the general issue, and two special pleas, as follows: and. for further plea, &c. &c., because they say, that at the time their testator signed the promissory note, in the plaintiff’s declaration mentioned, he, with others, whose names are thereto signed, for a long time before had been, and then were, trustees, and agents of the Methodist Episcopal Church of Gainesville, a religious association of persons, duly incorporated by law, and by virtue of-the powers vested in him…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
The declaration charges the testator of the plaintiffs in error, with making the note sued upon, in his individual name and cápacity. The defence set up is, that in making the note, he was acting as a trustee, and agent of a corporation — the Methodist Episcopal Church. The plea in which this defence is made is defective, in not alledging that he had authority to bind the corporation by his act, and that it had the faculty of becoming bound for the payment of money. Nor indeed does it appear that he undertook to bind the corporation. So far as we can judge of the note, from its description in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Reid v. BrasherSupreme Court of Alabama · 1838
3Cited by2 opinions
- Drake v. Elewellen & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1858
- Waddill v. Ala. & Tenn. Rivers RailroadSupreme Court of Alabama · 1859