Case Name: Miller v. Moore
Court: United States District Court for the District of Columbia
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1807-11
Citations: 1 Cranch 471
Docket Number: 
Parties: Miller v. Moore.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases argued and determined in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia (District of Columbia - reported by Mackey)
Volume: 1
Pages: 471–471

Head Matter:
Miller v. Moore.
In an action by the indorsee of a promissory note against the maker, the plaintiff need not produce written evidence of the authority of the indorser’s agent to indorse.
Debt on a promissory note, made by Moore to W. T. Alexander, or order, for value received, negotiable in the Bank of Alexandria ; indorsed, “ Pay to Richard and Stephen Winchester, or order ” — signed, “ William T. Alexander, by his attorney in fact, John T. Wellford ” —and “ pay Mordecai Miller,” (signed) “ R. & S. Winchester.”
Mr. Swann, for the defendant,
contended that the plaintiff must show a written authority from W. T. Alexander to John T. Well-ford, to indorse and transfer the note.

Opinion:
But the Court
permitted parol (vivd voce) testimony to be offered, to show that Wellford was an agent for Alexander, and that he had been accustomed to indorse the name of Alexander on notes, and that Alexander had sanctioned such indorsements.