Court Opinion

ID: 9688393
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 17:45:20.949418+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:38.020442
License: Public Domain

McCALEB, Judge
(concurring).
The bond in suit is unquestionably a statutory bond. Therefore, as correctly held by the Court of Appeal (see 37 So.2d 52), the statute must be read into the bond; superadded stipulations must be disregarded and necessary conditions must be supplied. Davis v. West Louisiana Bank, 155 La. 245, 99 So. 207 and Murphy Iron Works v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 169 La. 163, 124 So. 768.
Section 6 of Act 124 of 1942 declares " * * * the condition of said bond shall be that the principal therein named shall honestly conduct said business; * * * ”. This language is perfectly explicit. Hence, there is no room for interpretation. Article 13 of the Civil Code. Notwithstanding this, the majority, under the guise of construction, resolve that the legislature intended “ * * * that the bond prescribed by Section 6, as well as the entire statute, has for its purpose both the preventing of fraudulent practices by an operator and the insuring of performance of his contracts.” In concluding thus, the court has rewritten Section 6 and converted the fidelity bond therein provided for into a guaranty bond.
On the other hand, it is my view that the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the exception of no cause of action for it is alleged in the petition that Mizell, the operator, misled plaintiff into believing that the house was free of termites and that no repairs were needed. This allegation indicates, to my mind, a deceitful1 act on the part of Mizell which is sufficient to state a cause of action against his surety.
The bond required by the statute is a fidelity bond. Under the jurisprudence such a bond, indemnifying against loss by any act of “fraud” or “dishonesty”, is ordinarily held to extend beyond acts which *731are criminal; albeit, the words are given a broad significance and are construed most strongly against the insurer. See 50 Am.Jur. Verbo “Suretyship” Section 335. Any act disclosing an absence of integrity or fair dealing may be within the meaning of such a bond. Idem; see also annotation 98 A.L.R. 1264 and cases there cited.
For these reasons, I respectfully concur in the decree.

. Webster’s New International Dictionary (1931 Ed.) defines the word “mislead”— “To lead into a wrong way or path; to lead astray; to guide into error; to cause to err or mistake; to deceive.”