Legal Opinion

City of Ortonville v. Hahn

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided September 26, 1930No. 28,050PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilson, C. J.

Defendants appealed from an order denying their motion for a new trial.

Plaintiff seeks to recover upon the $10,000 official bond of defendant Hahn, its treasurer. The other defendants are his sureties. The Ortonville State Bank was duly designated as plaintiff’s de pository. It furnished a statutory bond in the sum of $10,000. The treasurer thereafter deposited money in the bank to the extent of $12,715.89, and while said sum was therein it failed and went into the hands of the commissioner of banks. Upon receiving a 15 per cent dividend from the commissioner, plaintiff applied $1,500 upon…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Journal Publishing Co. v. BarberSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  2. Cole v. MyersNebraska Supreme Court · 1916
  3. City of Cloquet v. Northwestern State BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
  4. London & Northwest American Mortgage Co. v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
  5. Minshull v. American Surety Co. of New YorkWashington Supreme Court · 1927

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. New York Casualty Co. v. SazenskiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1953
  2. School District No. 75 v. Farmers State BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
  3. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Village of MaywoodAppellate Court of Illinois · 1931
  4. Anderson v. Peterson State BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1934
  5. Benson v. American Surety Co. of New YorkSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1937

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API