United States v. McCartney
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts
This action was prosecuted against the sureties upon an official bond; the principal was named as a defendant, but was absent from the district and was not served with process.
Read the full summary
This action was prosecuted against the sureties upon an official bond; the principal was named as a defendant, but was absent from the district and was not served with process. In June, 1866, McCartney was collector of internal revenue for the third collection district of Massachusetts, and was duly directed by the secretary of the treasury to act as disbursing agent for that district, in accordance with section 4 of the act .of March 3, 1865, (13 Stats. 483,) and gave the bond in suit, which recites McCartney’s position as collector, and that the secretary has directed him to act as…
1Opinion of the CourtLowell, J.
The learned judge of the district court ruled, as I think I should have ruled in his place, that the bond remained valid only in respect to those disbursements 'which could have been required to be made by the collector under the law as it stood at the date of the bond. That this ruling was sound so far it sustained the obligation for the original duties of the principal obligor, if the evidence was such that the amount due for a breach of those duties could be discriminated from that which arose from a failure in the new duty, is not to doubted. Gaussen v. U. S. 97 U. S. 584; U. S. v.…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- United States v. KirkpatrickSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
- The People v. . VilasNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
- United States v. SingerSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Smith v. Board of SupervisorsIllinois Supreme Court · 1871
- Governor of Illinois v. RidgwayIllinois Supreme Court · 1850
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- National Surety Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
- Smith v. United StatesArizona Supreme Court · 1896