Legal Opinion

Pacific Indemnity Co. v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided June 8, 1931No. 6376PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

NETERER, District Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment for unpaid fines on a supersedeas bond in a criminal ease, given by the convicted party, one Randolph, as principal, and appellant as surety, conditioned that, “if the said J. W. Randolph shall'prosecute his appeal to effect, and if he fail to make his plea good; shall answer and pay all damages and costs and shall also personally be and appear * * * and shall surrender himself to the United States Marshal * * * then this obligation to be void.” The principal surrendered himelf to the marshal and is serving sentence, but did not pay…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Pierce v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
  2. Pease v. Rathbun-Jones Engineering Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917
  3. Catlett v. BrodieSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
  4. Connley v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1930
  5. County of Merced v. ShafferCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Cain v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1945
  2. Estes v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1944

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

Powered by the Exa API