Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

3 S.C.L. 426

Bacon v. Smith

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided May 15, 1804

Supreme Court of South Carolina · decided 1804-05-15

At the trial of this cause in Charleston» before Bay, J., it appeared that the plaintiff was a British subject, resident abroad ; and proof of a power to an agent in fact, competent to authorise the attorney at law to bring and prosecute the, action, was required: whereupon a letter was produced, purporting to be a letier of agency under the hand and seal oí a person bearing the name of the plaintiff, and purporting 10 be subscribed by the writer in the presence of iwo…

Decided 1804-05-15

By the court.

¶1It may be necessary sometimes to inquire, and see whether ¡he agent, or attorney, of an absent, and foreign plaintiff, is legally authorized t*> sue in the name of the plaintiff. This may be done, where it is shewn, or suggested, that the suit is brought, or prosecuted, without the knowledge or consent of the plaintiff himself: and the action may, in doubtful cases, be suspended until the truth is known. But the proof of the power, or appointment of the agent, is never required to be made according to those strict rules of evidence, which apply in other cases. And the want of such satisfactory proof as shall clearly shew that the agent is authorized, is never to be taken advantage of at the trial by way of nonsuit. It ought to be on a rule to shew cause why the action should not be dismissed. In this case the proof of authority seems to have been, prima jade at least, sufficient.

¶2Motion overruled.

Present, Trezevant, and Brevard. Justices.
/3/scl/426 · .json · Public domain