J. H. THERRELL, AS LIQUIDATOR OF THE BANK OF BAY BISCAYNE, A BANKING CORPORATION ORGANIZED AND EXISTING UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
E. M. TRUAX, APPELLEE
J. H. THERRELL, AS LIQUIDATOR OF THE BANK OF BAY BISCAYNE, A BANKING CORPORATION ORGANIZED AND EXISTING UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
E. M. TRUAX, APPELLEE
104 Fla. 715
Florida Supreme Court (1932)
Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 140 So. 782
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
—This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the decree herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said decree; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and decreed by the Court that the said decree of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.
Whitfield, P.J., and Terrell and Davis, J.J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ruwitch v. First Nat'l Bank OF Miami, 291 So. 2d 650 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)…We think this should be answered in the negative. INA was a surety for hire by the Bank and the equitable maxim “sureties are favored in the law” has no application to a company in the business of suretyship for hire. Tapping v. McIntosh, Fla.1932, 104 Fla. 715, 140 So. 773; Phoenix Indemnity Co. v. Board of Public Instruction, Fla.App.1959, 114 So. 2d 478. As such a surety, INA received premium payments from the Bank, and in turn agreed to insure the Bank upon the occurrence of certain specific risks, suc…
-
Daubmyre v. Hunter, 106 Fla. 858 (Fla. 1932)…e bond, which in such eases is to' be construed most strongly against the surety on the principles of law applicable to paid sureties, as heretofore approved by us. National Surety Co. v. Williams, 74 Fla. 446, 77 Sou. Rep. 212; Tapping v. McIntosh, 104 Fla. 715, 140 Sou. Rep. 773. Sureties on supersedeas bonds are presumed to have contracted with reference to damages which are the natural and proximate result of the appeal operating as a supersedeas for the purpose for which the bond was applied for and g…
-
The Sch. Bd. OF Pinellas Cnty. v. ST. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 449 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)…l, as surety, may be liable for the contractor’s breach of a contractual provision. City of Orlando v. H.L. Coble Co., 282 So. 2d 25, 27 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973). The principle was also illustrated by the supreme court’s decision in Tapping v. McIntosh, 104 Fla. 715, 718, 140 So. 773 (1932), where an owner sued a contractor and his surety. As here, the surety in Tapping issued a bond to protect the owner if the contractor failed to construct the building under the plans and specifications incorporated into the…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence