Legal Opinion
Earl v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 7, 1934No. Civ. No. 7888PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HAHN, J., pro tem.
Defendant appeals from a judgment rendered against it for the sum of $10,085 upon a “broker’s blanket bond” issued by defendant to plaintiff, to indemnify him against any losses suffered by him through certain prescribed acts of his employees in the brokerage business in which he was engaged in the city of Los Angeles.
The provisions of the surety bond in question which are material to the points raised on this appeal read as follows: “In consideration of the premium of Eleven Hundred and 00/100 ($1100.00) Dollars, paid by Wm. . Jarvis Earl & Company, hereinafter referred to…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Harris v. National Surety Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1927
- Security T. S. Bk. v. New York Indem. Co.California Supreme Court · 1934
- Sec. Tr. & Sav. Bank of San Diego v. N.Y. Indem. Co.California Supreme Court · 1934
3Cited by11 opinions
- Roth v. Maryland Cas. Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1954
- In Re Schluter, Green & Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1938
- Paddleford v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1938
- Sade v. National Surety CorporationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1962
- Matter of ClarkSupreme Court of Delaware · 1979
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.