Commonwealth v. American Bonding Co.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 20, Feb. T., 1904, by plaintiff, from judgment of of C. P. Lycoming Co., March T., 1900, No. 489, on verdict for defendant non obstante veredicto in case of Commonwealth to use of Leila D. Cowles v. The American Bonding Company. Assumpsit on a bond of a guardian. Error assigned was in entering judgment for defendant non obstante veredicto.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Beaver, J.,
The legal effect of the bond given by the defendant in this case and its liability thereunder for the misapplication of funds arising from the sale of the real estate of the use plaintiff were fully passed upon in Com. v. American Bonding & Trust Co., 16 Pa. Superior Ct. 570.
Little need be said in addition to what was said when the case was here on the question of the sufficiency of the affidavit of defense. It was then alleged: “ That the defendant knew that the bond was to be used in an application for the sale of real estate and that the guardian was the agent of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Commonwealth v. American Bonding & Trust Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1901
3Cited by2 opinions
- Commonwealth v. NestlerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1933
- Commonwealth v. PerregoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1909