TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Atchison v. Gulf Refining Co.

Atchison v. Gulf Ref. Co., 174 F.2d 476 (5th Cir. 1949)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
May 20, 1949
Docket
No. 12621
Judges
Holmes
Citations
174 F.2d 4761949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2226

Opinion of the Court — Holmes

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

HOLMES, Circuit Judge.

This is an action in tort by appellants against appellees for the alleged wrongful acts of their employees. One of the appellees is sued as the surety of the sheriff, who'was not made a party defendant. We agree with the court below that the surety on a sheriff’s bond cannot be sued without joining the principal if the latter has not been sued, is solvent, and is accessible to suit; but the court not only dismissed the action as to the surety but as to the other alleged tort-feasor, who was jointly and severally liable, and we think this was error.

It is tru'e that the appellants had the choice of forum and the right to sue the appellees jointly, but this did not deprive the appellees of their right to make separate defenses. When the separate defense of the surety was upheld, it warranted the dismissal of the action as to the surety but not as to the other defendant. We have been cited to no statute or decision which shows that there is any special rule in Louisiana on this subject, and the general rule is that joint tort-feasors may be held jointly or severally liable.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed as to the American Employers’ Insurance Company, but reversed as to the Gulf Refining Company and remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opin ion.

How later courts describe this case

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

1952: 11955: 11966: 119522026peak 1952 · 1

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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