Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

3 S.C.L. 257

Suckley v. Tunno

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided May 15, 1803

Supreme Court of South Carolina · decided 1803-05-15

The verdict was giveti for the plaintiff, in an action tried at Charleston, before Trezevant, J. The action was to recover the amount of a bill of exchange, drawn by one Joseph Doane, as the agent of the defendants. To prove that Donne was an authorized agent, plaintiff produced a letter of defendants, addressed to Doane, of the following tenor : “ Charleston, 10th June, lbOl.

Decided 1803-05-15

¶1The court,

(Bay, Trezevant, and Brevard, Just ces, in the absence of the other judges.)

¶2it does not appear, from the evidence stated, that the letter of the defendants authorized the draft in question. Agents may be clothed with either general or special powers. Their acts, as agents, must be confined within the sphere of the authority delegated. Here the power given was special and circumscribed, as to the nature and objects of it; although general, as it regarded those objects. The bill in question appears to be on account of a subject matter entirely foreign to the nature of the agency, and not by any means within the scope of the au* *260thority delegated. The defendants, therefore, cannot, by any principle, or fair rule of construction, be considered as having ever agreed to a bill drawn upon them on any such con-i teration. The verdict was, therefore, ordered to be set aside, and a new trial granted. It was also decided, that Doatie was a competent witness.

Pringle, for defendants. Cheves, for plaintiff.
/3/scl/257 · .json · Public domain