Farnsworth v. Rowe

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Farnsworth v. Rowe

33 Me. 263

CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine

DecidedJuly 1, 1851

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 33 Me. 263 (Farnsworth v. Rowe) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Farnsworth v. Rowe, 33 Me. 263 (Me. 1851).

Pincite

Opinion

Howard, J., orally,

— Prima fade, the name of W. Farnsworth is to be considered that of an attesting witness. His signature is at the place on the note, known to every business man as the place for the attestation. Long usage has confirmed this rule. It is of universal notoriety. Its legality is not to be questioned.

But it is objected, that he wrote his name there without request. This was not an unusual course. He was, however, the agent of the payee in receiving the note, and might properly witness it, at his own suggestion.

Exceptions overruled.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Howard, J., orally,

— Prima fade, the name of W. Farnsworth is to be considered that of an attesting witness. His signature is at the place on the note, known to every business man as the place for the attestation. Long usage has confirmed this rule. It is of universal notoriety. Its legality is not to be questioned.

But it is objected, that he wrote his name there without request. This was not an unusual course. He was, however, the agent of the payee in receiving the note, and might properly witness it, at his own suggestion.

Exceptions overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 Me. 263, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farnsworth-v-rowe-me-1851.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack