Chamberlain v. Godfrey
Supreme Court of Vermont
Debt on a bond held by a sheriff from his deputy. Plea, non est factum and two pleas of performance. The plaintiff joined issue on the first plea, and assigned two several breaches of the bond in suit. To the first assignment of breach the defendants Thurber, Bowles and Butler, who were the sureties, rejoined specially, — to which rejoinder the plaintiff demurred. The plaintiff withdrew the second assignment. The condition of the bond is given in the opinion of the court.
Read the full summary
Debt on a bond held by a sheriff from his deputy. Plea, non est factum and two pleas of performance. The plaintiff joined issue on the first plea, and assigned two several breaches of the bond in suit. To the first assignment of breach the defendants Thurber, Bowles and Butler, who were the sureties, rejoined specially, — to which rejoinder the plaintiff demurred. The plaintiff withdrew the second assignment. The condition of the bond is given in the opinion of the court. The plaintiff, who was sheriff of Orange County, was .sued on account of the default of the defendant, Godfrey, who was…
1Opinion of the CourtAddis, J.
The condition of the bond, which the sureties of *382the deputy sheriff gave to the sheriff, is that the deputy shall faithfully perforin the duties of his office and “ shall save and keep harmless and indemnified the said sheriff from all actions, suits, troubles, costs, charges, damages and expenses whatsoever on aecdunt or by reason of any malfeasance, misfeasance or non-feasance of said depnty.” The plaintiff, the sheriff, was sued for the neglect of the deputy in not paying over moneys collected on an execution. He notified the deputy thereof, who appeared in and defended the suit. But…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Douglass v. HowlandNew York Supreme Court · 1840
- Willey v. PaulkSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1825
- Parkhurst v. SumnerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1851
- McPherson v. CheadellNew York Supreme Court · 1840
- Berger v. WilliamsU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Michigan · 1849
3Cited by7 opinions
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. HaggartCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1908
- Beauchaine v. McKinnonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Costello v. BridgesWashington Supreme Court · 1914
- Ballantine & Sons v. FennSupreme Court of Vermont · 1911
- Howe v. ChesleySupreme Court of Vermont · 1883
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.