Conecticut Fire Ins. v. Oldendorff
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Oregon.
1Opinion of the Court
HAWLEY, District Judge.
This is an action at law, brought by the plaintiff in error against the defendants in error upon a joint bond given by E. Oidendorff & Co., as principal, and Frank Botefuhr and John Brendle, as sureties, for the faithful performance of the duties of the principal in the bond as the agent of the plaintiff in error for Multnomah county, Or. The defendants Mary Tynan and August Stoldt are the personal representatives of John Brendle, deceased. E. Oidendorff, the principal in the bond, made default, but no judgment has been entered against him. The case was regularly tried…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- United States v. AmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Robertson v. SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1821
- Mussina v. CavazosSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- Sessions v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Jehiel Brooks, in Error v. Samuel NorrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Porter v. BrookSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Blaffer v. New Orleans Water Supply Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1908
- Darnell v. Illinois Cent. R.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1913
- Smithies v. ColburnHawaii Supreme Court · 1910
- Rolim v. AxtiebDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1928