Alfano v. Donnelly
285 Mass. 554 (1934)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An agent's authority to execute a contract that is in fact sealed does not need to be under seal if the underlying contract was not one that the law requires to be sealed for its validity.
Facts:
- Mary J. Donnelly, a trustee, did business under the name John Donnelly & Sons.
- A written instrument was created for Donnelly to lease the roof of a building owned by the plaintiff, Alfano, for a term of five years.
- The instrument stated that the parties "have hereunto set their hands and seals," making it a sealed instrument in form.
- Agents I. J. Kennedy and R. H. Hager signed the instrument on behalf of John Donnelly & Sons.
- These agents had authority from Donnelly to sign the instrument, but this authority was not granted under seal.
- After the signing, Donnelly removed prior structures from the roof but did not use it again or make any of the agreed-upon rental payments.
Procedural Posture:
- Alfano sued Mary J. Donnelly in the trial court in an action of contract to recover three missed semi-annual rental payments.
- The trial judge found for the plaintiff, Alfano.
- The defendant, Donnelly, requested a report to the Appellate Division.
- The Appellate Division dismissed the report, affirming the trial court's decision.
- The defendant, Donnelly, appealed the dismissal to the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is a written lease, signed under seal by an agent whose authority was not granted under seal, enforceable as a simple contract against the principal if a seal was not legally required for that type of lease?
Opinions:
Majority - Lummus, J.
Yes, the lease is enforceable as a simple contract. The ancient principle that authority to sign a sealed instrument must be given under seal has a well-recognized exception. When an instrument is sealed but the law does not require a seal for its validity, an agent's unsealed authority is sufficient to bind the principal. In such cases, the seal is treated as surplusage, and the document is enforced as a simple unsealed contract. Under Massachusetts law, a lease of real estate for a term of not more than seven years does not require a seal. Since this was a five-year lease, no seal was required, and the contract is therefore enforceable despite the agent's lack of sealed authority.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces a practical exception to the formalistic 'equal dignities rule' for sealed instruments, preventing a party from using a technical defect in an agent's authority to evade a contract. It highlights the diminishing legal importance of the private seal in modern contract law. The court prioritizes the clear intent of the parties to be bound over a technical requirement that was not statutorily necessary for the specific transaction, thereby promoting commercial predictability and fairness.
Unlock the full brief for Alfano v. Donnelly