Legal Opinion

County of Modoc v. Madden

California Supreme Court

Decided March 22, 1902No. Sac. No. 860PublishedCited by 7 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Tirey L. Ford, Attorney-General, and John E. Raker, Ex-District Attorney, for Appellant.

1Opinion of the CourtVan Dyke, J.

This is an-appeal from an order changing the place of trial. The action was brought by the county of Modoc, plaintiff, against John Madden as principal, on a bond given by him as treasurer of said county, and twenty-two others, defendants, as sureties on said official bond, to recover the sum of $34,825.35, alleged to have been fraudulently appropriated by said defendant Madden to his own use and benefit while acting as such treasurer. The action was commenced August 5, 1897, and it appears that between the 23d of July, 1897, and the commencement of the action said Madden absconded. Service…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hearne v. De YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Greenleaf v. JacksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Goossen v. CliftonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
  2. Donohoe v. WoosterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
  3. Ward Manufacturing Co. v. MileyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
  4. Aisbett v. Paradise Mountain Mining & Milling Co.California Court of Appeal · 1913
  5. Briscoe v. Guarantee Mortgage Co.California Court of Appeal · 1922

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API