Eberman v. Massachusetts Bonding & Ins.

On both substantive and procedural grounds I think the judgment should be reversed.

1. The Substantive Question

Unlike a gratuitous or accommodation surety, this corporate bonding company is not a “favorite of the law” and not entitled to the protection of the strictissimi juris doctrine.1 The United States Supreme Court, adopting the same rule of construction as applies to insurance contracts has held that such a bond, if it be reasonably susceptible of two differing constructions, should be construed in a light favorable to the obligee.2 But even if it is to be construed strictly in favor of…