American Bonding Co. v. Allison

Fifth Circuit

American Bonding Co. v. Allison

182 F. 810, 105 C.C.A. 242, 1910 U.S. App. LEXIS 4981

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedNovember 3, 1910

DocketNo. 2,052

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 182 F. 810 (American Bonding Co. v. Allison) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

American Bonding Co. v. Allison, 182 F. 810, 105 C.C.A. 242, 1910 U.S. App. LEXIS 4981 (5th Cir. 1910).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The bond sued on was given and taken for the benefit of the estate of C. M. Burkhalter & Co. in bankruptcy, and it is immaterial whether the use alleged in the declaration was for the benefit of Rogers, receiver, or some other person representing the estate. And see United States v. Abeel, 174 Fed. 12-19, 98 C. C. A. 50; Boston El. Ry. Co. v. Grace & Hyde Co., 112 Fed. 284, 50 C. C. A. 239. We find no reversible error in the rulings on the pleadings.

The evidence objected to on the trial was admissible, and tended to establish the plaintiff’s demand. Under the evidence in the case, the court properly refused the instructions to the jury requested by the defendant below, and we find no reversible error in the peremptory instruction given in favor of the plaintiff below.

Judgment affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The bond sued on was given and taken for the benefit of the estate of C. M. Burkhalter & Co. in bankruptcy, and it is immaterial whether the use alleged in the declaration was for the benefit of Rogers, receiver, or some other person representing the estate. And see United States v. Abeel, 174 Fed. 12-19, 98 C. C. A. 50; Boston El. Ry. Co. v. Grace & Hyde Co., 112 Fed. 284, 50 C. C. A. 239. We find no reversible error in the rulings on the pleadings.

The evidence objected to on the trial was admissible, and tended to establish the plaintiff’s demand. Under the evidence in the case, the court properly refused the instructions to the jury requested by the defendant below, and we find no reversible error in the peremptory instruction given in favor of the plaintiff below.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

182 F. 810, 105 C.C.A. 242, 1910 U.S. App. LEXIS 4981, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-bonding-co-v-allison-ca5-1910.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack