State v. Wright
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Civil action on a bond given to the state for the faithful discharge bj the defendant Wright of his duties as county commissioner;' brought to the Superior Court. Cross-complaint filed by the defendant Mead, surety on the bond. Demurrer ‘to cross-complaint by plaintiff. Demurrer sustained, and cross-complaint dismissed. Facts found and judgment rendered by the court (Beardsley, J.,~) for the plaintiff. Appeal to this court by the defendant Mead.
Read the full summary
Civil action on a bond given to the state for the faithful discharge bj the defendant Wright of his duties as county commissioner;' brought to the Superior Court. Cross-complaint filed by the defendant Mead, surety on the bond. Demurrer ‘to cross-complaint by plaintiff. Demurrer sustained, and cross-complaint dismissed. Facts found and judgment rendered by the court (Beardsley, J.,~) for the plaintiff. Appeal to this court by the defendant Mead. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtPardee, J.
On June 29th, 1878, the defendants, E. T: Wright ás principal and Thomas A. Mead as surety, executed their bond to the State of Connecticut in the penal sum of $5,000, upon condition that the said Wright should faithfully discharge the duties of the office of county commissioner for Fairfield County for the period of three years from July 1st, 1878. In the last named month Wright was by his two associate commissioners made custodian of the money paid to them under the statute for licenses to sell spirituous liquors. Of such money during the year next ensuing he received and misappropriated…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Automotive Twins, Inc. v. KleinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
- Puleo v. GoldbergSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1942
- Allen v. ChaseSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1908
- Lowndes v. City National BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1907
- White v. Town of PortlandSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1896
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.