Milller v. Friedheim
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court; Edward W. Winfield, Judge; , Bondsmen are bound only by the instrument they sign, and not by what the principal in the bond knew. They are bound only in the manner and to the extent provided in the obligation. 6 Cyc. 82. They are only chargeable according to the strict the plans of the building, if made without their consent. 59 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court; Edward W. Winfield, Judge; , Bondsmen are bound only by the instrument they sign, and not by what the principal in the bond knew. They are bound only in the manner and to the extent provided in the obligation. 6 Cyc. 82. They are only chargeable according to the strict the plans of the building, if made without their consent. 59 Mo. App. 44; 65 Ark 550; 66 Id. 287; 71 Id. 199. Sureties on a bond are released by a substantial change in terms of the bond. 6 L. Ed. (U. S.), 189; 16 L. Ed. (U. S.), 689; 17 L. Ed. (U. S-), 789; 122 Mass. 467; 35 Mich. 365.
1Opinion of the CourtMcCureoch, J.
This is an action instituted by plaintiff, Lydia Friedheim, to recover the sum of $268.65, on a builder’^ contract and bond executed to her by the defendants, W. A. Thompson and his two sureties. Plaintiff recovered below the sum of $205.65 against all the defendants, and the two sureties appealed. It is alleged in the complaint that defendant Thompson entered into a contract with plaintiff to furnish the material and construct for her a cottage and barn, for the sum of $2,890, according to plans and specifications, which were made a part of the contract; and that defendants executed a bond…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Furst and Thomas v. RowlandSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1934