State ex rel. Zimmerman v. Chapman

Indiana Court of Appeals

State ex rel. Zimmerman v. Chapman

58 N.E. 1096, 26 Ind. App. 694, 1900 Ind. App. LEXIS 43

Indiana Court of Appeals·Decided December 20, 1900·No. No. 3,313·Published

Opinion

Comstock, J.

This is an action against a township trustee and his sureties to recover for alleged breaches of the official bond of the trustee. The complaint charges that the relators are the good-faith holders by assignment indorsed thereon of a warrant which had been wrongfully issued by the trustee.

The only question presented is the sufficiency of the complaint. This question was passed upon in State v. Hawes, 112 Ind. 323, and Grimsley v. State, 116 Ind. 130, adversely to appellants. The authorities are not in accord upon the questions involved, but the above decisions preclude further discussion by this court.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Comstock, J.

This is an action against a township trustee and his sureties to recover for alleged breaches of the official bond of the trustee. The complaint charges that the relators are the good-faith holders by assignment indorsed thereon of a warrant which had been wrongfully issued by the trustee.

The only question presented is the sufficiency of the complaint. This question was passed upon in State v. Hawes, 112 Ind. 323, and Grimsley v. State, 116 Ind. 130, adversely to appellants. The authorities are not in accord upon the questions involved, but the above decisions preclude further discussion by this court.

Judgment affirmed.

State ex rel. Zimmerman v. Chapman, 58 N.E. 1096, 26 Ind. App. 694, 1900 Ind. App. LEXIS 43 (Ind. Ct. App. 1900).

Pincite

58 N.E. 1096 (State ex rel. Zimmerman v. Chapman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related