Legal Opinion

Maryland Casualty Co. v. Jones

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided November 4, 1929No. 5366PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RUDKIN, Circuit Judge.

This was an action at law against a surety company on a bond of indemnity. The action was tried by the court without the intervention of a jury, by written stipulation of the parties. As is usually the ease, the action presented or involved two questions: First, the question of liability; and, second, the extent or amount of that liability. At the close of the testimony offered by both parties, the surety company interposed a so-called motion for non-suit on five different grounds. The third ground of the motion was that there was no evidence of any wrongful abstraction,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Fleischmann Construction Co. v. United States Ex Rel. ForsbergSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
  2. Maryland Casualty Co. v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
  3. American State Bank of Omaha v. Mueller Grain Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1926
  4. Mueller Grain Co. v. American State BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1927

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Gardner v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1934
  2. Love v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1935
  3. Century Indemnity Co. v. NelsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1936
  4. General Acc. Assur. Co. v. CaldwellCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1932

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API