Ingles v. Hotze, Case Number: 30316
| Court | Supreme Court of Oklahoma |
| Writing for the Court | DAVISON, J. |
| Citation | 191 Okla. 378,1942 OK 325,130 P.2d 302 |
| Parties | INGLES et al. v. HOTZE |
| Docket Number | Case Number: 30316 |
| Decision Date | 06 October 1942 |
1942 OK 325
130 P.2d 302
191 Okla. 378
INGLES et al.
v.
HOTZE
Case Number: 30316
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided: October 6, 1942
¶0 1. OFFICERS--Liability on official bond for act done within limits of official authority.
When an officer, while doing an act within the limits of his official authority, exercises such authority improperly, or exceeds his official power or abuses an official discretion vested in him, he becomes liable on his official bond to the person injured.
2. SAME--Surety not exonerated by fact peace officer acted improperly in performing his duties.
The fact that a peace officer may have acted improperly in performing his duties will not exonerate the surety on his official bond from liability for his conduct.
Robert D. Crowe, of Oklahoma City, for plaintiffs in error.
A. C. Hough and C. C. Andrews, both of Oklahoma City, for defendant in error.
DAVISON, J.
¶1 The plaintiff, Veatrice Hotze, filed an action for false imprisonment against the defendants, George Ingles, and the sureties on his bond, Bessie Taylor, and J. T. McGraw. Trial to a jury resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff in the sum of $200, from which the defendants have appealed. Three specifications of error are presented in the brief. The first one is that the evidence was not sufficient to sustain the verdict and judgment.
¶2 The facts disclose that on or about the 12th day of August, 1939, at 11 o'clock p.m. the defendant George Ingles came upon the plaintiff and one Howell parked in a truck at the side of the highway near Southwest 35th street and Meridian avenue in Oklahoma county. The truck had high sideboards and was completely enclosed. Defendant Ingles climbed up the side of the truck and threw a flashlight on the two persons in the inside of the rear or bed of the truck. Howell got out of the truck and after a few words with the defendant Ingles, Ingles directed plaintiff to get in his car and go with him to the office of a justice of the peace. This she did without complaint and defendant Ingles swore to and filed a complaint charging plaintiff with disturbing the peace "by the use of loud and boisterous languages." A warrant was issued on this complaint and plaintiff was placed in the county jail until she had perfected a bond. The case was never tried, but, after plain_ tiff had employed an attorney, same was disposed of by being dismissed by the county attorney for "failure to prosecute."
¶3 The defendant Ingles undertook to justify the arrest by the statement that, having received complaints from the neighborhood from which the arrest was made that a breach of the peace was being committed, he proceeded to the neighborhood and in driving around in that vicinity he found plaintiff and Howell parked in the place mentioned above, and that when he climbed up in the truck and flashed his light on the couple the man jumped up, thus indicating to Ingles that they were or had been in a compromising position. The plaintiff denied this and introduced evidence to establish that she and Howell were sitting in the bed of the truck carrying on a harmless conversation. No attempt was made by Ingles to sustain the complaint as to the breach of peace and he explains his filing this form of complaint by stating that in the conversation had with the said Howell outside the truck, Howell asked him to make the case as light as possible and for this reason he filed the complaint as aforesaid. Plaintiff denies any such conversation, or at least its purport for the purpose of binding her, and it is not contended that she heard or otherwise actively acquiesced in any such request.
¶4 The defendant Ingles was a constable and was acting within his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smith Eng'g Works v. Custer, Case Number: 30521
...Taylor v. Morgan, 43 Okla. 142, 141 P. 679. In this connection, see McCorcle v. Morton, 171 Okla. 632, 44 P. 2d 9, and Ingles v. Holtze, 191 Okla. 378, 130 P. 2d 302. ¶26 In Ingles v. Hotze, supra, we said:"The great weight of authority and especially the more recent cases regard wrongful a......
-
Smith Engineering Works v. Custer, 30521.
...Morgan, 43 Okl. 142, 141 P. 679. In this connection, see McCorcle v. Morton, 171 Okl. 632, 44 P.2d 9, and Ingles v. Hotze, 191 Okl. 378, 130 P.2d 302, 304. In Ingles v. Hotze, supra, we said: "The great weight of authority and especially the recent cases regard wrongful acts of a public off......
-
Surety v. Kelley, Case Number: 31720
...Counsel for the surety recognize that this court has also questioned the soundness of the above described distinction (Ingles v. Hotze, 191 Okla. 378, 130 P.2d 302) applied in earlier decisions (Hughes v. Board of Com'rs of Oklahoma County, 50 Okla. 410, 150 P. 1029, and cases therein cited......
-
Bynum v. Western Sur. Co. of Sioux Falls, S. D., 36978
...injury or death to another. No decision is cited showing such right of recovery. Plaintiff also cites Ingles v. Hotze, 191 Okl. 378, 130 P.2d 302, where the surety was sued on the statutory bond of a sheriff. The conditions for the bond required of a sheriff are prescribed by Section 512, 1......
-
Smith Eng'g Works v. Custer, Case Number: 30521
...Taylor v. Morgan, 43 Okla. 142, 141 P. 679. In this connection, see McCorcle v. Morton, 171 Okla. 632, 44 P. 2d 9, and Ingles v. Holtze, 191 Okla. 378, 130 P. 2d 302. ¶26 In Ingles v. Hotze, supra, we said:"The great weight of authority and especially the more recent cases regard wrongful a......
-
Smith Engineering Works v. Custer, 30521.
...Morgan, 43 Okl. 142, 141 P. 679. In this connection, see McCorcle v. Morton, 171 Okl. 632, 44 P.2d 9, and Ingles v. Hotze, 191 Okl. 378, 130 P.2d 302, 304. In Ingles v. Hotze, supra, we said: "The great weight of authority and especially the recent cases regard wrongful acts of a public off......
-
Surety v. Kelley, Case Number: 31720
...Counsel for the surety recognize that this court has also questioned the soundness of the above described distinction (Ingles v. Hotze, 191 Okla. 378, 130 P.2d 302) applied in earlier decisions (Hughes v. Board of Com'rs of Oklahoma County, 50 Okla. 410, 150 P. 1029, and cases therein cited......
-
Bynum v. Western Sur. Co. of Sioux Falls, S. D., 36978
...injury or death to another. No decision is cited showing such right of recovery. Plaintiff also cites Ingles v. Hotze, 191 Okl. 378, 130 P.2d 302, where the surety was sued on the statutory bond of a sheriff. The conditions for the bond required of a sheriff are prescribed by Section 512, 1......