Legal Opinion
State Athletic Commission v. Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 24, 1941No. Civ. No. 11415PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKnight, J.
The plaintiffs sued to recover a sum of money claimed to be due from the defendant as surety on a bond. Judgment was given for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals. Defendant does not deny liability on the bond, but contends that the judgment was awarded for an amount in excess of its liability, and that as against the correct amount it was entitled to have credited the sum of $1200 theretofore paid in cash by the principal to the obligee, and since held by the obligee for the purpose for which defendant became surety on the bond. We are of the opinion that both points are well taken.
*825The events…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Mulcahy v. BuckleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
- Van Orden v. AndersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- United States v. AllsburySupreme Court of the United States · 1866
- Alexander v. BosworthCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915
- Santa Barbara Lumber Co. v. RossCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Fred Howland Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1966
- Yang v. Dar Al-Handash ConsultantsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- ITT Diversified Credit Corp. v. Highlands InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1987
- Moffett v. MillerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
- In re LaBonneUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Connecticut · 1988
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.