Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Anderson

As I read the cases of Frederickson v. American Surety Co. 135 Minn. 346, 160 N. W. 859, and Southern Surety Co. v. Tessum, 178 Minn. 495, 228 N. W. 326, 66 A. L. R. 1136, I am forced to the conclusion that there should be an affirmance in this case. In .the Frederickson case it was stated that the general bondsmen rvere primarily liable for any and all defaults of the guardian. In the Tessum case (citing the Frederickson case) it was stated that the liability of the bondsmen on the sales bond was cumulative and that there was no need of distinguishing between the two. In the majority opinion…