Bedford Commercial Insurance v. Covell
This text of 49 Mass. 442 (Bedford Commercial Insurance v. Covell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This case is governed by that of Stackpole v. Arnold, 11 Mass. 27, which decides, in a similar case, where insurance was effected by an agent, and his note given, that although the agent had full authority to bind his principal, if he had chosen to do so, yet having given his own note, and that note being accepted without reference to his authority to act for another, the agent, and not the principal, was bound by it. Indeed, in one particular, the present case is much stronger for the defendant, than the case cited. In that case, the agent had not charged the premium to his principal, nor had the underwriter made any claim on the agent for the premium [444]*444But, in this case, Stowell charged the premium in account with the defendant, and had it allowed; and the plaintiffs proved the note, as a claim against Stowell, and received a dividend upon it.
Judgment for the defendant.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
49 Mass. 442, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bedford-commercial-insurance-v-covell-mass-1844.