For delegated signatures, index the delegation instrument, its date, named principal, named agent, scope, and any revocation or expiration record located. Compare the capacity in the contract with the capacity in the delegation. Do not assume that a power of attorney covering personal matters covers a property transaction. The authority index should make the source and unresolved question visible while avoiding a conclusion about statutory scope.
An estate property contract can look complete while leaving the most important preliminary question unanswered: who had authority to sign it? A signature line identifies a person, but it does not by itself establish the person’s role, appointment, delegation, or limits. Reviewers who build an authority chain give the supervising professional a clearer record of what the file proves and what it does not.
Start with the exact transaction
Write down the property, contract date, parties, and transaction type before collecting authority documents. A personal representative selling one parcel is a different review from a trustee leasing another parcel or an agent signing a purchase agreement under a power of attorney. Keep the scope narrow enough that every conclusion can be tied to one agreement. If the file contains several properties, assign each property its own identifier rather than relying on a shared matter name.
Identify the claimed role
Read the signature block, introductory paragraphs, and any attached capacity language. Record whether the signer appears as personal representative, executor, administrator, trustee, attorney-in-fact, guardian, beneficiary, manager, or individual owner. Copy the role exactly as written and note every variation elsewhere in the file. A mismatch between “executor” in an email and “administrator” in the contract is a review issue to preserve, not a wording difference to silently correct.
Assemble the authority sources
Collect the appointment order, letters of authority, trust certification, power of attorney, court order, deed, entity record, and amendments that the file identifies as relevant. Capture issuing body, issue date, effective date, expiration or revocation language, and the person named. The goal is a source map, not a stack of undifferentiated PDFs. Record where each source was obtained and whether it is signed, certified, recorded, or an informational copy.
Test continuity across names
Compare the signer’s legal name with the authority record, contract party, deed, and correspondence. Note middle initials, former names, spelling differences, business suffixes, and abbreviated capacities. For an entity, record the entity name and the individual’s position separately. For a trust, distinguish the trust name from the trustee’s name. A reviewer can flag a continuity gap without deciding whether a jurisdiction treats the variation as material.
Check the time sequence
Put the events in order: death or transfer event, appointment, authority document, contract execution, amendment, closing, and any later revocation. A document issued after signing may explain a later ratification, but it does not automatically prove authority on the original date. Preserve the date of each source and use “not located” when the file does not establish an event. Avoid filling gaps with assumptions based on family relationships or customary practice.
Separate authority from transaction terms
An appointment may establish a role without answering whether a particular sale, lease, price, financing arrangement, or settlement required additional approval. Build separate fields for role evidence, property interest, transaction permission, required consent, and evidence of consent. This separation prevents a reviewer from treating a valid appointment as proof that every contract term was authorized.
Record restrictions and exceptions
Look for geographic limits, dollar limits, co-signature requirements, court approval language, notice requirements, and conditions attached to the authority. Also record documents that appear to narrow or revoke an earlier grant. An exception log should state the source, the conflicting language, the date, and the question for professional review. It should not label the agreement enforceable or unenforceable.
Make the handoff usable
The final authority index should list the contract, signer, claimed capacity, source documents, date coverage, unresolved discrepancies, and next owner. Link each entry to the page or section where the relevant language appears. If a source is missing, say what was searched and what remains unavailable. This lets counsel or the fiduciary decide whether to request a certified copy, seek consent, obtain ratification, or take another step appropriate to the matter.
A compact authority index
| Field | Example entry | Why preserve it |
|---|---|---|
| Contract identifier | Parcel B purchase agreement, signed copy | Fixes the review target |
| Signer and capacity | Jordan Lee, administrator | Distinguishes person from role |
| Authority source | Appointment order, issued date | Shows the evidence reviewed |
| Time coverage | Effective before contract date | Exposes chronology |
| Limitation | Co-signature language noted | Routes a focused question |
| Open item | Certified copy not located | Prevents false completeness |
An authority-chain review is administrative evidence gathering. It helps the responsible professional see the record, the chronology, and the gaps; it does not replace jurisdiction-specific advice or a decision about legal sufficiency.
When the chain contains a gap, identify the precise missing link: appointment date, certified copy, delegation, property permission, co-signature, or later ratification record. Do not describe the entire contract as unauthorized because one source is absent. A narrow exception tells the professional exactly what to request and preserves a fair distinction between incomplete evidence and a legal conclusion.