Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Thomas

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided June 6, 1930No. 13,195Published

1DissentJanvier, J.

In addition to the reasons given in my dissenting opinion in U. S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Crais, 127 So. 414, I now desire to present what I consider further sound objections to a decree iii favor of defendant.

The surety company executed in favor of the bank an indemnity agreement under which it undertook to make good any loss sustained by the bank as a result of two different main classes of criminal acts: First, defalcations of employees; second, robberies, holdups, etc., by third persons. The bond thus partook of two characters. So far as it guaranteed against loss caused by criminal…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. First National Bank of Crandon v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Commercial Nat. Bank v. RichardsonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1927
  3. Southern Surety Co. v. Citizens' State Bank of HempsteadCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1919
  4. New Orleans & Carrollton Railroad v. ChapmanSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1853
  5. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. CraisLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API