Legal Opinion · Dissent

Johnson Controls, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided May 9, 2014No. 1121288Published

1DissentMoore, Chief Justice

Because Batson-Cook Company (“Bat-son-Cook”) must be liable to Johnson Controls, Inc. (“JCI”), before Liberty Mutual *264Insurance Company (“Liberty Mutual”) can be liable to JCI, I respectfully dissent.

I. The Terms of the Payment Bond Control

The majority opinion fails to address the operative terms of the payment bond between Batson-Cook and Liberty Mutual (“the bond”). “[Suretyship is a contractual relationship. Consequently, we begin our inquiry into the liability of [the surety] by reviewing the terms of the surety contract itself.” Ex parte Lawyers Sur. Corp., 719 So.2d 833, 835 (Ala.1998).…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Clifford F. MacEvoy Co. v. United States Ex Rel. Calvin Tomkins Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
  2. Miller v. StewartSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
  3. Ex Parte Dan Tucker Auto Sales, Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1998
  4. Ex Parte State Dept. of RevenueSupreme Court of Alabama · 1996
  5. Darks Dairy, Inc. v. Ala. Dairy Com'nSupreme Court of Alabama · 1979

21 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