Maryland Casualty Co. v. Holmes
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
FOSTER, Justice.
The original bill seeks relief on behalf of minor -wards in two alternative aspects. In the second paragraph, one aspect is alleged to result from the fact that the guardian deposited in a bank the money which was lost by the failure of the bank, and that, under the agreement the deposit was made subject to the joint control of the guardian and the surety on his bond. This is upon the principle of our case of Bates v. Jones, 224 Ala. 82, 139 So. 242. In the third paragraph, the other aspect is alleged to exist because the money was not deposited as such in bank,'but was made a…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Nelson & Hatch v. DunnSupreme Court of Alabama · 1849
- Faulk & Co. v. Hobbie Grocery Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1912
- Wilkinson v. RoperSupreme Court of Alabama · 1883
- Davis v. CookSupreme Court of Alabama · 1880
- Ashe-Carson Co. v. BonifaySupreme Court of Alabama · 1906
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Riley v. WilkinsonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1945
- Emens v. StephensSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
- Maya Corporation v. SmithSupreme Court of Alabama · 1940
- Patterson v. LoveladySupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
- Smith v. ColpackSupreme Court of Alabama · 1938
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.