United States v. Anderson

24 F. Cas. 811, 1 Blatchf. 330

This text of 24 F. Cas. 811 (United States v. Anderson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Anderson, 24 F. Cas. 811, 1 Blatchf. 330 (circtsdny 1848).

Opinion

THE COURT

held that the testator became absolutely bound: that the recital in the bond, that it was deemed expedient that Hoyt should give additional security, did not necessarily or by any fair inference import conditional or contingent security: that the condition of the bond was in the terms prescribed by the first section of the act of congress of March 2. 1799 (1 Stat. 705), and found in all the official bonds of collectors; that the recitals were intended to show that Phelps was not the sole surety for Hoyt, but had become such in addition to the sureties in the two prior bonds; that such additional security might be absolute or conditional, depending upon the terms of the obligation; and that, in this instance, it was as absolute as words could make it.

Judgment for plaintiffs.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
24 F. Cas. 811, 1 Blatchf. 330, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-anderson-circtsdny-1848.