American Surety Co. v. Conway
Supreme Court of New Jersey
* On appeal from a decree of the court of chancery advised by Vice-Chancellor Stevens, who filed the following opinion: This is a creditor’s bill. The pertinent facts axe undisputed. James Conway was a contractor. He became interested in a contract made with the town of Wakefield by the firm of Minaban & Costa, and lie joined in a bond of indemnity given to the complainant, the American Surety Company, which had guaranteed the proper performance of the work.
Read the full summary
* On appeal from a decree of the court of chancery advised by Vice-Chancellor Stevens, who filed the following opinion: This is a creditor’s bill. The pertinent facts axe undisputed. James Conway was a contractor. He became interested in a contract made with the town of Wakefield by the firm of Minaban & Costa, and lie joined in a bond of indemnity given to the complainant, the American Surety Company, which had guaranteed the proper performance of the work. The contractors defaulted ; the town sued in the Massachusetts courts and recovered judgment. Thereupon the complainant paid the amount…
1Per curiam
The decree ajipealed from will he affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the*court below by Vicc-C-hancellor Stevens.
For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Swayze, Trenchard, Bergen, Minturn, Kalisch, Black. White, Williams, Gardner — 10. For reversal — Parker—1.
2Cited by21 opinions
- Tyler v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1880
- Shearer v. WeaverSupreme Court of Iowa · 1881
- Nat'l Prem. Budget Plan Corp. v. Nat'l Fire Ins.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1967
- Brown v. BrownSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1881
- Colegrove v. BehrleNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1960
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.