DocketNumber: 5 Div. 90.
Judges: Gardner, Anderson, Bouldin, Foster
Filed Date: 1/14/1932
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/2/2024
No defense as to further reduction was interposed, and we may add that, if interposed, we do not think it could have been sustained by evidence as to a mere estimate the receiver hoped or expected to pay depositors at some future date. There is nothing in the bond to the effect that liability thereon should be thus deferred to the date of settlement of the receivership. Indeed, the language of paragraphs 7 and 8, providing for subrogation of the surety as to such future dividends, indicate to the contrary, and nothing in the opinion rendered bears any relation to these provisions of the bond or any rights thereunder.
The application for rehearing is denied.
ANDERSON, C. J., and BOULDIN and FOSTER, JJ., concur.