Kirkpatrick v. Douglas
Montana Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Angstman
The complaint in this action contains two causes of action, each relating to a separate highway project. Under the first cause of action it was shown that on October 11, 1932, defendant A. R. Douglas was awarded and entered into a contract with the state of Montana through the State Highway Commission for the construction of a designated highway. Defendant surety company became surety on the bond furnished under section 5668.41, Revised Codes. In May, 1933, defendant Douglas made a contract subletting the work to the plaintiffs, who agreed to assume all the duties and obligations of Douglas…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Cascade Lumber Co. v. Aetna Indemnity Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1910
- State Ex Rel. Matson v. O'HernMontana Supreme Court · 1937
- United States ex rel. Brown-Ketcham Iron Works v. RobinsonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1914
- Clifton, Applegate & Toole v. Big Lake Drain District No. 1Montana Supreme Court · 1928
- Denny-Renton Clay & Coal Co. v. National Surety Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1916
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- School District No. 1 Ex Rel. Lynch Co. v. Rushlight & Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1962
- H. Earl Clack Co. v. StauntonMontana Supreme Court · 1937
- State v. Walter LarsonMontana Supreme Court · 2015