ALICE I. BANKHEAD, Appellant,
CHARLES RAYMOND HOWE, AMOS A. BETTS, WILLIAM M. COX, LOREN VAUGHAN, JOHN CUMMARD, WILSON T. WRIGHT, PACIFIC INDEMNITY COMPANY, a Corporation, MASSACHUSETTS BONDING AND INSURANCE COMPANY, a Corporation, FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND, a Corporation, AMERICAN SURETY COMPANY, a Corporation, GLOBE INDEMNITY COMPANY, a Corporation, and THE FIDELITY AND CASUALTY COMPANY OF NEW YORK, a Corporation, Appellees
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the County of Maricopa. Arthur T. LaPrade, Judge. Judgment affirmed.
Messrs. Struckmeyer & Flynn and Mr. H. S. McCluskey, for Appellant.
Messrs. Baker & Whitney and Mr. Lawrence L. Howe, for Appellees William M. Cox, Charles Raymond Howe, Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland and Pacific Indemnity Company.
Messrs. Silverthorne & Silverthorne, for Appellee Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland.
Messrs Rawlins & Rawlins and Mr. Arthur M. Davis, for Appellees John Cummard and Globe Indemnity Company.
Messrs. Townsend, Jenckes & Wildman, for Appellees Loren Vaughn and American Surety Company.
Mr. Riney B. Salmon, for Appellees Wilson T. Wright and Fidelity and Casualty Company of New York.
Mr. Forrest A. Betts of Los Angeles, California, and Mr. Henderson Stockton, for Appellees Amos A. Betts and Massachusetts Bonding and Insurance Company and Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland.
Mr. Joe Conway, Attorney General, and Mr. Charles Bernstein, Assistant Attorney General, for Appellees Amos A. Betts, William M. Cox, Charles Raymond Howe, Loren L. Vaughn, John Cummard and Wilson T. Wright.
[56 Ariz. 260] LOCKWOOD, J.
Alice I. Bankhead, hereinafter called plaintiff, brought suit against Charles Raymond Howe, Amos A. Betts, William M. Cox, Loren Vaughn, John Cummard and Wilson T. Wright, hereinafter called defendants, and various corporations which from time to time were sureties for defendants in their official capacities as members of the Corporation Commission of the State of Arizona, hereinafter called the commission. Defendants demurred to the complaint on several grounds, among them being that there was a defect of parties defendant and misjoinder of parties defendant, and that the causes of action set up in the complaint were barred by the statutes of limitation. The court sustained the demurrers on both grounds and allowed twenty days to amend, and plaintiff electing to stand upon her complaint, judgment was rendered in favor of defendants, whereupon this appeal was taken.
The question before us is whether either of the two demurrers was properly sustained, and in considering that we must, for the purpose of the demurrers only, assume that all the allegations of the complaint, which was filed December 21, 1938, are true. It is lengthy and we summarize it, so far as is necessary for the purpose of this opinion, as follows: The various defendants were members of the commission at various times from January 1, 1929, to December 31, 1938. They did not all serve at the same time, the [56 Ariz. 261] commission at one time being composed of one group, and at others of a different group of the defendants. The various surety companies were the sureties on the official bonds ...