Legal Opinion

United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Samuels

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 25, 1927No. 20171PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMatthias, J.

The principal question presented is whether this bond covers the action of Wollitz which resulted in the injury complained of; it being contended by counsel for the surety company that the condition of the bond that Wollitz would “faithfully perform the duties of the office of policeman” had the effect only of a guaranty that he would not violate his oath to faithfully, honestly, and impartially discharge his duties as an officer, nor exceed the powers conferred upon him as such officer. It is not claimed that the injury to the plaintiff was not caused by Wollitz while the latter was in the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. American Guaranty Co. v. McNieceOhio Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. BoehnleinCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1924
  3. Maryland Casualty Co. v. McDiarmidOhio Supreme Court · 1927

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Commerce & Industry Insurance v. City of ToledoOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Commisso v. MeekerNew York Court of Appeals · 1960
  3. Eubanks v. WoodCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1957
  4. Scot Lad Foods, Inc. v. Secretary of StateOhio Supreme Court · 1981
  5. Agnew v. PorterOhio Supreme Court · 1970

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API