Brooks v. Merchants N. Bank

Citations

• 125 Pa. 394
• 17 A. 418
• 1889 Pa. LEXIS 729

Syllabus

<p>1. Promissory notes given subsequently to the act of June 3, 1887, P. L. 832, by a firm of which a married woman is a member, in renewal of notes given by the same firm prior to said act, are valid as against the married woman, the moral obligation to pay the original notes being a sufficient consideration for the renewals.</p> <p>(a) In an action of assumpsit by a bank, the statement of claim was signed by the cashier but without the word “cashier” added to the signature and without an averment in the statement that the affiant was the cashier.</p> <p>(b) The affidavit of defence alleging insufficiency of the statement, a rule for judgment was made absolute, and an order was entered at the time permitting the word “cashier” to-be added to the affiant’s signature.</p> <p>2. As the objection to the statement was purely technical, and the defendants, being customers of the bank, were presumed to know that the plaintiff was a corporation which could act only through its officers and that the person signing the statement was its cashier, no valid defence being made on the merits, the judgment would not be reversed.</p>