Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Mobile County
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from Mobile Circuit Court. Tried before Hon. Wm. S. Anderson. The case is fully set out in the opinion. in their argument to show that the surety on the bond of the tax collector was not liable for defaults and misappropriations of the tax collector occurring prior to the execution and approval of the bond upon Avhicli he Avas surety, the folloAving authorities. — Randolph v. Billing, 115 Ala. 682; Governor v. Robbins, 7 Ala. 79; Dumas v. Patterson, 9 Ala. 484;…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Mobile Circuit Court. Tried before Hon. Wm. S. Anderson. The case is fully set out in the opinion. in their argument to show that the surety on the bond of the tax collector was not liable for defaults and misappropriations of the tax collector occurring prior to the execution and approval of the bond upon Avhicli he Avas surety, the folloAving authorities. — Randolph v. Billing, 115 Ala. 682; Governor v. Robbins, 7 Ala. 79; Dumas v. Patterson, 9 Ala. 484; Townsend v. Gibson, 14 Ala.. 334; Townsend v. Everett, 4 Ala. 607; U. 8. v. Boyd, 15 Peters 187; Myers v. U. 8., 1 McLean 493;…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCLELLAN, C. J.
— This action is prosecuted by the county of Mobile against the Fidelity & Deposit Company of Maryland on a bond executed by E. B. Lott as principal and said company as surety conditioned for the faithful discharge of the duties of the office of tax collector of Mobile county by said Lott. The breaches of said bond assigned in the complaint are, in substance: first, that said Lott failed to collect the taxes assessed for and due to said county and to pay over the same to the county treasurer; second, that Lott, as said tax col lector, collected, to-Avit, the sum of nineteen thousand, one…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Bruce v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1855
- Plowman v. HendersonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1877
- Kling v. ConnellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1894
- Burnett v. NesmithSupreme Court of Alabama · 1878
- Person v. ThorntonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
3Cited by6 opinions
- Craft v. Standard Acc. Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1929
- Bromberg v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1903
- Gottsegan Cicar Co. v. LevyUtah Supreme Court · 1913
- Walker County v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of MarylandCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1901
- Accident Ins. Department of Order of Railway Conductors of America v. BrooksSupreme Court of Alabama · 1926
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.