Connelly v. American Bonding & Trust Co.
Decision Date | 10 October 1902 |
Citation | 113 Ky. 903,69 S.W. 959 |
Parties | CONNELLY v. AMERICAN BONDING & TRUST CO. |
Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from circuit court, Campbell county.
"To be officially reported."
Action by Robert Connelly against the American Bonding & Trust Company. From a judgment in favor of defendant, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Lucius Desha and H. H. Deputy, for appellant.
C.J. & W. W. Helm, for appellee.
O'REAR J.
Appellant brought this suit against John T. Stapleton, a policeman of the city of Newport, and his surety, the American Bonding & Trust Company of Baltimore City, Md. The action is upon a bond executed by the policeman, which was as follows: The breach is alleged to be this: That the principal, Stapleton, and another police officer of Newport, on the 9th day of June, 1901, while acting as such policemen in said city, "without warrant, judicial order, or other authority of law, and against plaintiff's will, wrongfully and forcibly arrested the plaintiff, and deprived him of his liberty, to his great humiliation, disgrace, and bodily and mental pain and injury, to his damage in the sum of $500"; also, that the said officers, "without warrant, judicial order, or other authority of law, wrongfully, cruelly, and severely assaulted, beat, and bruised plaintiff, and thereby caused plaintiff to suffer great physical and mental pain and anguish, to plaintiff's damage in the sum of $500"; also, that said officers, "without warrant, judicial order, or other authority of law, wrongfully and forcibly compelled plaintiff to go with them through the public street of said city to the police office of said city, and thence conveyed plaintiff to be unlawfully confined in said jail from the hours of 12 o'clock midnight until 9 o'clock next morning, to plaintiff's great humiliation, disgrace," etc. The bond above quoted was executed under section 3141, Ky. St., as follows: Under this authority, the city of Newport passed the following ordinance, approved May 17, 1894, to wit:
It is thought that this bond does not indemnify any person other than the city of Newport, because the undertaking is to the said city alone. We are, however, of the opinion that the bond is controlled by the following sections of Kentucky Statutes, and must be read in connection therewith, and that under the provisions of these sections the informality of not naming the commonwealth of Kentucky as the obligee of the bond will not prevent a recovery thereon by the person aggrieved. Said sections are as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Sewell v. Bennett
... ... 630, 64 S.W. 467, 23 Ky. Law Rep ... 856; Connelly v. American Bonding & Trust Co., 113 ... Ky. 903, 69 S.W. 959, 24 Ky ... ...
-
Hogg v. Lorenz
... ... consistently with his official obligations. Connelly v ... American Bonding & Trust Co., 113 Ky. 903, 69 S.W. 959, ... 24 ... ...
-
Hogg v. Lorenz
...the contrary, that the magistrate acted lawfully and consistently with his official obligations. Connelly v. American Bonding & Trust Co., 113 Ky. 903, 69 S.W. 959, 24 Ky. Law Rep. 714; Baker v. Combs, 194 Ky. 260, 239 S.W. The liability of the constable and his surety depend upon whether t......
-
West v. Nantz' Adm'r
...will do aught which it is against his official duty to do, or will omit to do aught which his official duty requires should be done." The Connelly opinion expressly says that in of an officer--in cases where he had power to act in the manner charged only in a certain contingency--it will be......