Legal Opinion · Dissent

Purdy v. Massey

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 1, 1931No. Appeal, 305Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Mr. Justice Kephart:

My objection to the majority opinion relates solely to the rule relating to the measure of damages which is there adopted and based on Mechanics Trust Co. v. Fidelity Casualty Co., 304 Pa. 526, as controlling.

"While there is a distinction between indemnity and guaranty bonds, it is not important where only the measure of damages is involved. Under either contract the rule as to damages is compensation for the loss suffered. In one it is payable only when the insured actually sustains and has paid a loss; in the other, the compensation is recoverable…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Keck v. BieberSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
  2. Mechanics Trust Co. v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  3. Province Securities Corp. v. Maryland Casualty Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1929
  4. Longfellow v. McGregorSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
  5. Wheeler v. Equitable Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1908

6 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