Leonard v. County Court Of Jackson County.
Decision Date | 15 November 1884 |
Citation | 25 W.Va. 45 |
Court | West Virginia Supreme Court |
Parties | Leonard v. County Court of Jackson County.*(Johnson, P., absent.) |
1. The liability of a surety is not to be extended by implication beyond the terms of his contract. To the extent, and in the manner, and under the circumstances, pointed out in his obligation, he is bound and no farther. It is not sufficient that he may sustain no injury by a change in the contract, or that it may even be for his benefit. He lias a right to stand upon the very terms of his contract. If the contract has been altered in the slightest particular, without his assent, he may say, Non in haec faedera vent."
2 Commissioners on behalf of the supervisors of a county contract with a bridge-builder to build a bridge for the county, reciting that the contractor is a bridge builder by trade and that the commissioners know but little about bridges, and providing that the contractor shall furnish all the materials and complete the bridge in a durable and substantial manner so that it shall stand the test of time and flood and be finished 1 and delivered for use on or before December 1, 1868; the bridge to be paid for in installments, but the last installment, which is to be paid by certificates of indebtedness out of the county levy of 1809, is not to be paid until the whole work is completed and received. For the faithful performance of this contract the contractor executed bond with securities. Upon the report of the commissioners that the bridge had been completed so far as they can see except one of the abutments which seems to them to be cracking and settling, the supervisors on Nov. 16, 1868, issued certificates for the last instalment to be paid out of the levy of 1869 and delivered them to the contractor. Within two years thereafter, a part of the bridge fell down and the county brought an action at law on the bond against the sureties therein. They filed their bill in equity, alleging the foregoing facts and claiming that the supervisors, by receiving the bridge in the condition it was and making the last payment as they did, varied and changed the obligation of their undertaking and thereby released them from liability on their bond, and asking a perpetual injuction against the prosecution of said action at law against them. Held:
That facts alleged in the bill did not show that the obligation of the plaintiffs had been varied or changed by the action of the supervisors, and that they were, consequently not discharged, and that the bill should be dismissed on demurrer.
Snyder, Judge, furnishes the following statement of the case:
The board of supervisors of Jackson county, by orders made and entered of record September 2, 1867, and October 7, 1867, appointed R. S. Brown and others commissioners to contract for the building of a bridge across Big Sandy creek near Ravenswood, in said county, in the manner and upon the terms and conditions specified therein. Pursuant to the authority thus vested in them, the commissioners, on October 29, 1867, made a contract with George K. Leonard, by which the latter agreed to build said bridge according to the plan and specifications therein set forth; and among other stipulations therein contained, are the following:
At the same time, to-wit, Oct. 29, 1867, the said George K. Leonard and A. G. Leonard, Thompson Leach, W. B. Caswell and Alfred Foster as his sureties executed to said commissioners their joint and several bond in the penalty of $10,000 with the following condition thereto:
"The condition of the above obligation is such that whereas, the above bound George K. Leonard did, on the 29th day of October, 1867, make and enter into a contract with R. S. Brown, Charles Harpold, John Rawding, Deming Wagner and Isiah Morgan, commissioners acting for and on behalf of said board of supervisors, whereby the said Leonard agreed to build, erect and complete a good and substantial bridge, with solid stone abutments and good and durable superstructure, to be in all respects erected, built and completed according to said contract in writing to be attached to these presents, and reference is here given thereto for more full particulars of the way and manner said bridge is to be completed: Now, if the said George K. Leonard shall erect and complete the said bridge at the place within the time and in manner prescribed in the said contract hereunto annexed as aforesaid, and shall in all respects comply with the said contract on his part, then this obligation to be void, else to remain in full force and virtue."
Subsequently, the commissioners made their report to the board of supervisors in these words:
On November 16, 1868, the board of supervisors entered this report on their order-book and made and entered thereunder this order:
Afterward, on July 24, 1871, the supervisors instituted an action of covenant in the circuit court of Wood county against said George K. Leonard and his sureties on said bond of Oct. 29, 1867 for an alleged breach of the condition thereof by the said George K. Leonard. The declaration in this action, after averring generally the breaches complained of, states that the said George K. Leonard failed to build said bridge in the manner and of the material specified in the said contract and that by reason of such failure, "in a very short time after the bridge was put up both of the abutments and all of the wing-walls gave way, and the whole structure from these causes and by reason of many other breaches in said contract, gave way and settled in such a manner that it had to be propped up, and the plaintiff was put to great trouble and expense, to-wit, to the expense of $3,000 in repairing the said bridge so as to make it at all safe for the public to pass over it." The damages claimed are $10,000. For...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
First Nat. Bank Of Cumeerland. v. Petitioner
... ... Bank of Cumeerland et al. v. Parsons et al. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia. Submitted January 28, ... day of Jane, 1895, by the Circuit Court of Tucker county in four chancery causes heard together. The facts are as ... c. 21; Leonard v. County Court, 25 W. Va. 45; Bigg v. Parsons, 29 ... ...
-
Pickelsimer v. Glazener
... ... v. GLAZENER et al. (No. 505.) Supreme Court of North Carolina. May 26, 1917. [92 S.E. 701] Appeal from Superior Court, Transylvania County; Harding, Judge. Action by J. H. and C. W. Pickelsimer ... Jur. 325; Leonard v. County Court, 25 W. Va. 45; 13 Dig. Va. and W. Va ... When execution was issued against the person of Jackson, it was, and not before, the duty of the defendant to ... ...
-
Rigg v. Parsons
... ... PARSONS and others. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.April 9, 1887 ... county ... S. A ... Miller and J. H ... terms of his contract. Leonard v ... County Court, 25 W.Va. 45; Miller ... v. Stewart, ... ...
-
Carr v. Sutton
... ... 239 70 W.Va. 417 CARR v. SUTTON et al. Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.February 27, 1912 ... County ... Bill in ... equity by William H ... 1 Story, Eq ... Jur. § 325; Leonard v. County Court, 25 W.Va. 45; 13 ... Dig. Va. & W.Va. Rep ... ...