Case ID: ny_245/html/0561-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Edward S. Bowlend, Jr., Appellant, v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, Respondent.
    (Argued April 7, 1927;
    decided May 3, 1927.)
    
      Principal and surety —■ undertaking —• bonds — condition that judgment not exceeding stated amount with interest and costs will be paid — surety not liable for running interest on claim, when such interest with principal sum recovered exceeds penal sum. of undertaking.
    
    
      Bowlend v. United States F. & G. Co., 218 App. Div. 656, affirmed.
    Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered February 11, 1927, in favor of defendant, upon the submission of a controversy under sections 546 and 547 of the Civil Practice Act. The controversy was as to the proper interpretation of an undertaking the condition of which was that “ the defendant, Frederick A. De Pilis, will, on demand, pay to the plaintiff the amount of any judgment which may be recovered in the action against the defendant, Frederick A. De Pilis, not exceeding the sum of One thousand (11,000) Dollars with interest and costs.” On March 16, 1926, plaintiff took judgment against De Pilis for $1,000, the amount of his claim, with $198 interest, being the amount accrued from October 21, 1922, and $186.71 costs. Defendant herein paid plaintiff the amount of its conceded liability, namely, $1,000, with interest from March 16, 1926, the date of the judgment against De Pilis, and $186.71 costs, with interest thereon from March 16, 1926. The question was as to plaintiff’s right to the additional $198 “ running interest ” on plaintiff’s claim against De Pilis. The Appellate Division held that the surety company was liable only for the amounts specified in the bond.
    
      W. N. Seligsberg, Clarence M. Lewis and Donald Marks for appellant.
    
      William J. McArthur for respondent.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cardozo, Ch. J., Pound, Crane, Andrews, Lehman, Kellogg and O’Hrien, JJ.