Amer. Telegraph Co. v. Lennig

Citations

• 139 Pa. 594
• 27 W.N.C. 349
• 21 A. 162
• 1891 Pa. LEXIS 1027

Syllabus

<p>[To be reported.]</p> <p>1. When one becomes surety in an official bond, reciting that-the principal has been appointed to a particular office, mere general words in the condition of the bond will not, unless a clear intent to the contrary be shown, extend the liability of the surety to the acts of the principal after a change in that office.</p> <p>2. The obligation of a surety cannot be extended by implication beyond the terms of his contract. He is bound only to the extent, and in the manner, and under the circumstances pointed out in his obligation; and if the principal parties, without his consent, change the contract in a material part, so as to affect the nature and extent of his responsibility, he is discharged.</p> <p>3. Wherefore, if, after the giving of a bond of suretyship for the faithful performance of the duties of a corporate officer, the duties and responsibilities pertaining to the office are materially changed by the obligee, so as to affect the responsibility and risk of the surety, the- bond, as to him at least, is thereby discharged.</p> <p>4. The surety will not, in general, be relieved from responsibility, however, merely because the act of his principal, which occasioned the loss to the obligee, was not strictly in the line of the duties of his office, or was done in the course of a temporary or casual performance of other ■duties at the request of the employer.</p> <p>5. Nor will the imposition of additional, distinct and consistent duties upon the principal, ov his appointment to an additional office, his original office still being retained, necessarily relieve the surety from his obligation, if the new duties, or the new office, have no such connection with the old as to. interfere with or affect the original employment.</p> <p>(íí) ' In an action upon the official bond of the book-keeper of a corporation the testimony tended to show that, on a certain date, the principal in the bond made a false entry in the plaintiff’s books, to con