Truax v. Capitol Life Ins. Co., Case Number: 22533
| Court | Supreme Court of Oklahoma |
| Writing for the Court | OSBORN, J. |
| Citation | 1933 OK 596,26 P.2d 755,166 Okla. 153 |
| Docket Number | Case Number: 22533 |
| Decision Date | 07 November 1933 |
| Parties | TRUAX v. CAPITOL LIFE INS. CO. |
1933 OK 596
26 P.2d 755
166 Okla. 153
TRUAX
v.
CAPITOL LIFE INS. CO.
Case Number: 22533
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided: November 7, 1933
¶0 1. Appeal and Error--Review--Sufficiency of Evidence to Support Judgment in Law Action Tried to Court.
In a law action where trial by a jury is waived, the finding and judgment of the trial court will not be disturbed on appeal because of the insufficiency of the evidence, if there is any evidence reasonably tending to support such judgment and finding.
2. Principal and Surety--Action on Surety Bond--Bond Held to Provide for Attorney's Fee in Addition to Amount of Penalty Provided.
In an action on a surety bond in which the sureties acknowledged themselves to be held and firmly bound in the sum of $ 2,500, together with ten per cent. attorney's fees, if suit be instituted under the bond, "together with" means "in addition to," and the trial court did not err in granting judgment against the sureties thereon for $ 250 attorney's fees in addition to the full amount of penalty provided in the bond.
Wilson, Wilson & Owens, for plaintiff in error.
Embry, Johnson, Crowe & Tolbert, for defendant in error.
OSBORN, J.
¶1 This action was commenced in the district court of Oklahoma county by the Capitol Life Insurance Company, a corporation, against James B. Holmes and H. D. Truax. A jury was waived and the cause tried by the court, who rendered a judgment in favor of plaintiff, from which the defendant Truax has appealed. The parties will be referred to as they appeared in the trial court.
¶2 The defendant James B. Holmes was employed by the plaintiff on January 23, 1928, as an insurance soliciting agent, and on the following day a surety bond was executed to plaintiff by James B. Holmes, as principal, H. D. Truax and W. L. Marley, as sureties, in the sum of $ 2,500. The condition of the bond was the faithful performance of the duties of an insurance agent on the part of said Holmes in paying and accounting for all funds coming into his hands as agent for the company. W. L. Marley was not made a party to the action.
¶3 This is an action against Truax on the bond and against Holmes for a balance due on account, in which it is alleged that the said Holmes is indebted to plaintiff in the sum of $...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Tex. Co. v. State ex rel. Coryell, Case Number: 31827
...The constitutional provision did not negative corporate ownership of rural lands, but amplified it. Truax v. Capitol Life Ins. Co., 166 Okla. 153, 26 P.2d 755. ¶8 In Oklahoma Natural Gas Co. v. State ex rel. Vassar, 187 Okla. 164, 101 P.2d 793, this court analyzed the whole of section 2, ar......
-
Leckie v. Dunbar, Case Number: 24899
...P.2d 696; Hotel Tulsa Tailors v. Tulsa Industrial Loan & Investment Co., 167 Okla. 472, 30 P.2d 682; Traux v. Capitol Life Insurance Co., 166 Okla. 153, 26 P.2d 755. The trial judge was in a position to observe the demeanor of the witnesses giving conflicting testimony, and under the rule j......
-
State ex rel. Sanchez v. Reese, No. 8733
...'in addition to' and 'together with' are held to be synonymous. To the same effect is Truax v. Capitol Life Ins. Co., 166 Okl. 153, 26 P.2d 755 We conclude that by making the Supreme Court Addition Fund fee collectible 'in addition' to other fees it is made certain that the legislature did ......
-
United Bonding Ins. Co. v. Banco Suizo-Panameno, SA, No. 27546.
...the recovery under the bonds is not specifically limited to the penalty amount. See Truax v. Capitol Life Ins. Co., 1933, 166 Okl. 153, 26 P.2d 755. We therefore hold that the District Court was not clearly erroneous in finding that Banco reasonably relied to its detriment on the apparent a......
-
Tex. Co. v. State ex rel. Coryell, Case Number: 31827
...The constitutional provision did not negative corporate ownership of rural lands, but amplified it. Truax v. Capitol Life Ins. Co., 166 Okla. 153, 26 P.2d 755. ¶8 In Oklahoma Natural Gas Co. v. State ex rel. Vassar, 187 Okla. 164, 101 P.2d 793, this court analyzed the whole of section 2, ar......
-
Leckie v. Dunbar, Case Number: 24899
...P.2d 696; Hotel Tulsa Tailors v. Tulsa Industrial Loan & Investment Co., 167 Okla. 472, 30 P.2d 682; Traux v. Capitol Life Insurance Co., 166 Okla. 153, 26 P.2d 755. The trial judge was in a position to observe the demeanor of the witnesses giving conflicting testimony, and under the rule j......
-
State ex rel. Sanchez v. Reese, No. 8733
...'in addition to' and 'together with' are held to be synonymous. To the same effect is Truax v. Capitol Life Ins. Co., 166 Okl. 153, 26 P.2d 755 We conclude that by making the Supreme Court Addition Fund fee collectible 'in addition' to other fees it is made certain that the legislature did ......
-
United Bonding Ins. Co. v. Banco Suizo-Panameno, SA, No. 27546.
...the recovery under the bonds is not specifically limited to the penalty amount. See Truax v. Capitol Life Ins. Co., 1933, 166 Okl. 153, 26 P.2d 755. We therefore hold that the District Court was not clearly erroneous in finding that Banco reasonably relied to its detriment on the apparent a......