Legal Opinion
Louis Pizitz Dry Goods Co. v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided October 8, 1931No. 6 Div. 786PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGardner, J.
The suit is upon a fidelity bond, and the question presented for decision is whether or not a disbursement of the funds of the employer by the employee in disregard of the known rules of the former, but innocently so far as regards any intent to injure or defraud, is a willful misapplication thereof within the meaning of the language of the bond, the substance of which is set out in count 1 of the complaint appearing in the report of the case.
We have examined with much care the authorities relied upon by counsel for appellant (among them: May v. N. Y. Motion Picture Corporation, 45 Cal. App.…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- United States v. BrittonSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Illinois Central Railroad v. LeinerIllinois Supreme Court · 1903
- Anderson v. . HowNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- State v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1916
- May v. New York Motion Picture Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1920
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Nettles v. LichtmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1934
- Anderson v. Indiana Lumbermens Mutual Ins. Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1961
- Goode v. TylerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1939
- Holt v. LongSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
- Interstate Electric Co. v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1934
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.