Waterous Engine Works Co. v. Village of Clinton
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Big Stone'county to recover $596.07 (the amount of plaintiff’s unpaid judgment against Bichard IT. Chapman, senior, for material furnished the latter) for failure to require of Chapman a contractor’s bond under Laws 1901, c. 321,, he being insolvent.
Read the full summary
Action in the district court for Big Stone'county to recover $596.07 (the amount of plaintiff’s unpaid judgment against Bichard IT. Chapman, senior, for material furnished the latter) for failure to require of Chapman a contractor’s bond under Laws 1901, c. 321,, he being insolvent. The answer alleged that, if any valid contract, was ever made between defendant and Chapman and a bond given either as therein alleged or otherwise, plaintiff was by such bond amply protected, but that plaintiff had forfeited all rights thereunder by failure to give notice to the principal and sureties on that…
1Opinion of the CourtO’Brien, J.
The village of Clinton made a contract with B. H. Chapman,, Senior, extending its water system, for the contract price of $6,300. Chapman, as principal, and six sureties, executed a bond to secure the performance of the contract, which provided that the principal and sureties were “held and firmly bound unto the village of Clinton, located in Big Stone county, Minnesota, in the sum of three thousand five hundred dollars, * * * to be paid to the said village of Clinton. * * *
“Now therefore, if the said B. H. Chapman, Sr., * * * pays for all of said work and labor performed and skill, material,…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Jefferson v. AschSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- United States ex rel. Anniston Pipe & Foundry Co. v. National Surety Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1899
- Doll v. CrumeNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
- Grant v. BerrisfordSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1904
- United States, ex rel. Fidelity Nat. Bank v. RundleCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1900
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Title Guaranty & Surety Co. v. State ex rel. Leavenworth State BankIndiana Court of Appeals · 1915
- Fay v. Bankers Surety Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
- Fairmont Cement Stone Manufacturing Co. v. DavisonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- Scott-Graff Lumber Co. v. Independent School District No. 1Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
- Fargo Cornice & Ornament Co. v. School District No. 88Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.