TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Councill v. Horton

George R. Councill v. John Horton.

Councill v. Horton, 88 N.C. 222 (1883)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of North Carolina · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 5, 1883
Judges
Ashe
Citations
88 N.C. 222
Cited by 5
Headnotes
Bankruptcy. No debt created by the fraud or embezzlement of the bankrupt, or by his defalcation as a public officer (here, as sheriff) or while acting in a fiduciary capacity, shall be discharged by proceedings in bankruptcy.
Summary
Civil ActioN commenced in a justice’s court, and tried on appeal at Spring Term, 1882, of Watauga Superior Court, before Avery, J. The facts agreed upon are as follows: The defendant was sheriff of Watauga county in 1872, and gave his official bond in the sum of $16,000, conditioned for paying county and school taxes, (fee., in the several forms prescribed by law, and the plaintiff was one of his sureties thereto. The defendant failed to perform the conditions, and an action was brought on the bond by the county commissioners against the defendant, together with the plaintiff and the other sureties, and judgment was rendered in favor of the commissioners at fall term, 1875, for $1,099. The plaintiff paid upon this judgment the sum of $155, within one year before the 14th of May, 1881, when this action was brought. The defendant was adjudicated a bankrupt and received his discharge after said judgment was rendered, and before this action was commenced. The court gave judgment in favor of the plaintiff for $155, interest and costs, and the defendant appealed.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Ashe

*223 Ashe, J.

The action, in which judgment was obtained against, the defendant, as sheriff, and his sureties, was for a breach of his official bond in not paying over to the county the sum due for taxes, either not collected or collected and not paid over by him.

It is declared by section 33» of the bankrupt act, “that no debt created by the fraud or embezzlement of the bankrupt, or by his defalcation as a public officer, or while acting in a fiduciary character, shall be discharged under this act.”

The debt upon which the judgment against the defendant and his sureties was rendered, was created by the defalcation of the defendant, as sheriff. The debt was then not discharged by the bankruptcy of the defendant. Debts created by the defalcation of a public officer, and those of a fiduciary character, are put by the act in the same class. The same principle that applies to the one will apply to the other; and it has been held by the supreme court of Kentucky that a discharge in bankruptcy does not relieve a guardian from his fiduciary obligations, as such, and if his surety discharges these and obtains a judgment therefor, he may levy upon the property of the bankrupt acquired after his discharge.

Carlin v. Carlin, 8 Bush, 141 ; approved in Simpson v. Simpson, 80 N. C., 332 , and Calvert v. Peebles, Ib., 334.

No error. Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 5 cases

View all citing references →
1888: 21946: 11957: 11958: 118882026peak 1888 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. Golombosky50 A.2d 817 (Conn. 1946)
  2. United States Credit Bureau, Inc. v. Manning305 P.2d 970 (Cal. Ct. App. 1957)
  3. Madison Township v. Dunkle16 N.E. 593 (Ind. 1888)
  4. Fireman's Fund Indemnity Co. v. Caruso90 N.W.2d 302 (Minn. 1958)
  5. State ex rel. Mock v. Howell8 S.E. 167 (N.C. 1888)

Most recent

  1. Fireman's Fund Indemnity Co. v. Caruso90 N.W.2d 302 (Minn. 1958)
  2. United States Credit Bureau, Inc. v. Manning305 P.2d 970 (Cal. Ct. App. 1957)
  3. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. Golombosky50 A.2d 817 (Conn. 1946)
  4. State ex rel. Mock v. Howell8 S.E. 167 (N.C. 1888)
  5. Madison Township v. Dunkle16 N.E. 593 (Ind. 1888)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Simpson v. Simpson, 80 N.C. 332 (1879) 15
Carlin's adm'r v. Carlin, 71 Ky. 141 (1871) 4

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list