Legal Opinion

Mann v. Burt

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided January 15, 1886PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Error from Cowley District Court. Action brought in the district court of Cowley county under tbe provisions of chapter 136 of the Laws of 1872, in which the plaintiff alleged that the defendant company had failed to take the bond from the contractor who constructed a portion of its road, and he asked that the company be held liable for certain labor performed for the contractor upon the road, and for which he had not paid.

Read the full summary

Error from Cowley District Court. Action brought in the district court of Cowley county under tbe provisions of chapter 136 of the Laws of 1872, in which the plaintiff alleged that the defendant company had failed to take the bond from the contractor who constructed a portion of its road, and he asked that the company be held liable for certain labor performed for the contractor upon the road, and for which he had not paid. The answer of the railroad company was a general denial, to which were added the following defenses: “ 2. And for a second and further defense to the action of the…

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Johnston, J.:

*12i Bona of contractor; flung. *11The question raised by the demurrer to the second defense is, upon what contingency does the liability of the railroad company for the debts of the contractor who constructed its road depend? It is alleged that the company took from the contractor a good and sufficient bond—such as is *12provided for in chapter 136 of the Laws of 1872,"but it is not averred that the bond was filed by the railroad company in the office of the register of deeds of the county where the work was done. The omission of this averment is…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Balch v. . N.Y. and Oswego Midland R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1871
  2. M. K. & T. Railway Co. v. BakerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1875
  3. Groves v. Kansas City, St. Joseph & Council Bluffs, RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Moore-Mansfield Construction Co v. Indianapolis, Newcastle & Toledo Railway Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Indianapolis Northern Traction Co. v. BrennanIndiana Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Cincinnati, Richmond & Muncie Railroad v. SheraIndiana Court of Appeals · 1905
  4. Union Traction Co. v. Standard Brick Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1923
  5. State Ex Rel. Winebrenner v. Detroit Fidelity & Surety Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1930

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

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

Powered by the Exa API