The Pacific Reporter, Volume 8West Publishing Company, 1886 - Law reports, digests, etc |
From inside the book
Results 1-5 of 100
Page 19
There was nothing voluntary about it, and plaintiff was not entitled, before suit
brought, to recover it back from the warehouseman, and the contract having been
broken by defendant, he became liable for this sum paid on account thereof.
There was nothing voluntary about it, and plaintiff was not entitled, before suit
brought, to recover it back from the warehouseman, and the contract having been
broken by defendant, he became liable for this sum paid on account thereof.
Page 59
Where a corporate officer gives a bond for the due performance of his duties
during his term of office for one year, the sureties on such bond are not liable for
a defalcation occurring after such term of office has expired, as the bond expires
with ...
Where a corporate officer gives a bond for the due performance of his duties
during his term of office for one year, the sureties on such bond are not liable for
a defalcation occurring after such term of office has expired, as the bond expires
with ...
Page 60
... have become liable, and are bound to pay, to said plaintiff the said sum of
$4,500.60, with interest from the first of May, ... on the ground that the same
shows the defendants are not liable on the bond for any part of the moneys
mentioned in ...
... have become liable, and are bound to pay, to said plaintiff the said sum of
$4,500.60, with interest from the first of May, ... on the ground that the same
shows the defendants are not liable on the bond for any part of the moneys
mentioned in ...
Page 62
It may be doubted whether the plaintiff could render the defendants liable on the
bond for any period by merely omitting to name a successor. But here, his term
having expired, the directors reappointed Allen. The bond in suit does not
provide ...
It may be doubted whether the plaintiff could render the defendants liable on the
bond for any period by merely omitting to name a successor. But here, his term
having expired, the directors reappointed Allen. The bond in suit does not
provide ...
Page 63
A principal in a bond is no further bound than his sureties. Bigelow v. Bridge, 8
Mass. 274. Appellant's counsel suggests: “Suppose a principal forged the name
of a surety: the surety would not be liable, but the principal would be.” In that case
...
A principal in a bond is no further bound than his sureties. Bigelow v. Bridge, 8
Mass. 274. Appellant's counsel suggests: “Suppose a principal forged the name
of a surety: the surety would not be liable, but the principal would be.” In that case
...
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
affidavit affirmed agent alleged amount answer Appeal from superior assignment Atchison county attorney authority Blue Rapids bond cause of action charge claim Code commenced complaint concur constitution contract conveyance corporation counsel creditors damages debt deed defendant's demurrer district court election entitled evidence execution fact favor fence fendant Filed November fraud garnishee Harper county held injury instruction intoxicating issued judgment and order jury Kansas Kansas Pacific Railway land legislature liable Marion county ment mortgage motion N. W. Rep negligence notice objection Osage county owner paid party payment person petition plaintiff in error possession premises proceedings promissory note prosecution purchase question railroad company reason recover respondent reversed road sheriff statute of limitations sufficient superior court supreme court sustained testified testimony thereof tion Topeka township trial verdict void witness