This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1895 Excerpt: ...recovered judgment against C., E. and two of the other sureties, the sureties enjoin it on the ground that M., having under his contract bound himself not to enforce his debt until the first of September, and by this act failed to have his debt satisfied out of the land, had discharged the sureties. Held: M. was not bound by the contract to sue upon the bond before the first of September, and was not bound under the circumstances to carry out the contract; and therefore the sureties are not released. In the case of Richmond & Petersburg Railroad Company.vs. Kasey et als., 30 Grat., 218, decided March, 1878. K., as a general freight and ticket agent of the Richmond & Petersburg Railroad Company, gave a bond with sureties. The rule of the company was, that he should settle monthly, and though there was no rule on the subject, it was expected that freight and tickets should be paid for in cash. K. seems to have given credit at his own risk to such persons as he chose, for the freight, and this was known by the president, who remonstrated with him for doing it. He did not settle his accounts properly, and the deficit grew for eighteen months, when he was dismissed. There was no fraudulent concealment of these facts by the officers of the company, though the sureties of K. were not informed of them. Held: The sureties are not released from their liability for the default of K. by the knowledge of the-officers of the company and that he gave credit for the freight delivered. And if there had been a rule that freight should be paid for in cash, and that rule had been changed after the execution of the bond, that would not have released the sureties. There having been no fraudulent concealment of the fact that K. did not settle promptly, the failure to info...
"synopsis" may belong to another edition of this title.