OK. English is not my first language and that's why my first post wasn't enough precise.
When I was writting about attorney I meant a person who acts on someone's else behalf, not a legal profession.
In the country where I come from there is a rule:
§ 1. If a person executing a contract as an attorney-in-fact has no authorization or exceeds its scope, the validity
of the contract depends on it being ratified by the person on behalf of whom it was executed.
§ 2. The other party may set the person on behalf of whom the contract was executed an appropriate period in
which to ratify the contract; he is released when that period passes to no effect.
§ 3. In the absence of ratification, a person who executes a contract on another person's behalf is obliged to
return anything he has received from the other party in performance of the contract and to remedy any damage
which the other party has suffered due to the fact that it executed a contract without knowing that there was no
authorization or that its scope had been exceeded.
t means that the contract made by a person acting as an attorney-in-fact without authorization is voidable. In practice, a person on behalf whom a contract was executed, makes an official statement (usually before notary public) in which he/she confirms this contract and says that it was executed on his or her behalf. Of course it is possible as well to say that the contract is void as executed without authorization.
Could you explain me how such situation is regulated in American law (especially New Jersey)? Is there any rules stating that such ratification of contract made with no authorization is possible? How can this be done?