Johnson v. Provincial Ins. Co., of Toronto
Decision Date | 08 January 1864 |
Citation | 12 Mich. 216 |
Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
Parties | Hiram R. Johnson v. The Provincial Insurance Company of Toronto |
Heard October 30, 1863 [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material]
Error to Wayne Circuit.
On July 22, 1858, the defendants in error filed their declaration in said court, against Roderick M. Chittendon, Hiram R. Johnson and Hiram R. Andrews, upon a bond given by them, conditioned that said Chittendon should, from time to time, account for and pay or cause to be paid to said insurance company, all such moneys as should be by him received for said company, and well and faithfully execute and perform his duties as agent of said company. Breach, that said Chittendon failed to account for and pay over the sum of $ 555.36 by him received for the company.
September 14, 1858, the company recovered judgment in said suit by default, for $ 2,000, the penalty of the bond, and had their damages assessed at $ 565.61.
November 29, 1859, scire facias was issued upon said judgment as follows:
"The People of the State of Michigan, to the Sheriff of the County of Wayne, Greeting:
[SEAL.] "Whereas, The Provincial Insurance Company of Toronto, of the Province of Canada, heretofore, to wit: on the fourteenth day of September, 1858, in the Circuit Court for the county of Wayne, and state of Michigan, recovered against Roderick M. Chittendon, Hiram R. Johnson, and Hiram R. Andrews, judgment for a certain debt of $ 2,000; and whereas, the said court also awarded execution against the said Roderick M. Chittendon, Hiram R. Johnson and Hiram R. Andrews, for the sum of $ 565.61, ascertained and determined by said court to be the amount due the said plaintiff, by reason of the breach of a certain writing obligatory, hereinafter mentioned, being part of said debt for which said judgment was rendered, and also their costs and charges expended in that behalf by said plaintiffs, whereof the said Roderick M. Chittendon, Hiram R. Johnson and Hiram R. Andrews were convicted, as by the record and proceedings thereof remaining in said Circuit Court, before the judge thereof, at the city of Detroit in said county of Wayne, manifestly appears.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Guettel v. United States
...Reprint, 721, 722, 723; Kane v. Morehouse, 46 Conn. 300, 304; Gedney v. Gedney, 160 N.Y. 471, 475, 55 N.E. 1; Johnson v. Provincial Ins. Co., 12 Mich. 216, 222, 86 Am.Dec. 49; Phillips v. Bossard, D.C., 35 F. 99; Vineseck v. Great Northern R. Co., 136 Minn. 96, 161 N.W. 494, 2 A.L.R. We hav......
-
Wilson v. Colorado Mining Co.
... ... nonexistence of the intent to abandon. Manhattan Life ... Ins. Co. v. Wright, 126 F. 82, 89, 61 C.C.A. 138, 145; ... Saxlehner v ... Cocks, 19 Wend. (N.Y.) 207, 209, 32 ... Am. Dec. 448; Johnson v. Provincial Ins. Co., 12 ... Mich. 216, 222, 86 Am. Dec. 49. But, in ... ...
-
Vineseck v. Great Northern Railway Company
... ... Jacobson v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. 132 Minn ... 181, 156 N.W. 251, L.R.A.1916D, 144. We ... the fraud of defendant. Johnson v. Provincial Ins ... Co. 12 Mich. 216, 86 Am. Dec. 49 ... ...
-
Burton Tp. of Genesee County v. Speck
...265, 268, 269, 246 N.W. 84), there is an exception as to one in a fiduciary or confidential relationship. Johnson v. Provincial Insurance Company of Toronto, 12 Mich. 216, 222, 223; Tompkins v. Holister, 60 Mich. 470, 479, 27 N.W. 651; Barrett v. Breault, 275 Mich. 482, 491, 267 N.W. 544; C......