[DOWNLOAD] "Metropolitan Casualty Co. v. Billings" by Supreme Court of Connecticut # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Metropolitan Casualty Co. v. Billings
- Author : Supreme Court of Connecticut
- Release Date : January 11, 1963
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 63 KB
Description
This case was tried, pursuant to the parties'
agreement in open court, on issues
[150 Conn. 605]
joined on statements of claim filed by the defendants
Gordon and Helene Billings and the defendant
Saul Feldman in an action of interpleader which
was brought by the plaintiff and later withdrawn.
The defendants sought to recover on a surety bond
issued by the plaintiff on February 25, 1958.
Since the governing statutes have not been amended
in any way significant to this case, current
citations will be employed. The plaintiff as
surety and Henry Perrault as principal posted the
bond in the amount of $2500 with the insurance
commissioner, who is charged by statute with the
issuance of licenses to real estate brokers and
salesmen. General Statutes 20-312. The bond was
given, pursuant to the requirements of General
Statutes 20-315, to enable Perrault, who paid a
premium of $17.50, to secure a real estate
broker's license under chapter 392 of the General
Statutes. By a letter dated February 6, 1959, the
plaintiff renewed the bond as of February 25,
1959, for an additional three-year period for a
premium of $43.75. On February 10 and 11, 1959,
Perrault, acting as a real estate broker, received
from the defendants Billings $5000, which he
converted to his own use. On May 5, 1959, acting
as a real estate broker, he received from the
Billings' $15,300, which he also converted to his
own use. The trial court concluded that the bond
created a continuous rather than an annually
cumulative obligation and gave the Billings'
judgment for $2500 with interest from June 10,
1960, the date of demand on the surety - a total of
$2754.17. Gordon and Helene Billings, hereinafter
referred to as the defendants, have appealed. The
trial court rendered judgment in favor of the
plaintiff as to the defendant Feldman, and he has
not appealed.