Legal Opinion

Phoenix Assurance Co. v. Young

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided June 27, 1961No. 38898PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Felton, Chief Judge.

The bond contemplated by Code Ann. § 84-1409, codifying acts of the General Assembly, noted at the foot of the section, is required to have the condition of the obligation that the bond shall be subject to suit by action thereon by any person Who shall sustain actionable injuries or loss, or damage, for the purpose of indemnifying any person injured, or damaged, or who' may suffer loss, due to any wrongful act of any broker, his agents or employees, and that said broker should be bound under said bond to faithfully perform all of his duties as such broker, so far as public…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Eberman v. Massachusetts Bonding & Ins.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1945
  2. Babb & Nolan v. HuietCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1942
  3. Iusi v. ChaseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  4. Ferguson v. SchuenemannCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  5. Gilewicz v. Home Indemnity CompanyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1959

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Middelsteadt v. KarpeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
  2. Cannon v. Florida Real Estate CommissionDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1969
  3. Collier v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity CompanyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1962

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

Powered by the Exa API