Legal Opinion
Port of Seattle v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.
Washington Supreme Court
Decided January 20, 1936No. 25804. Department OnePublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGeraghty, J.
This is an appeal from an order of the trial court striking plaintiff’s third amended complaint and dismissing the action.
The case arose out of a schedule surety bond issued by the defendant to the port of Seattle, covering its employees, including among them Matt H. Gormley, auditor of the port. The bond was conditioned to
“. . . indemnify and save harmless the port of Seattle from any and all loss which it may sustain through the failure of any employee named in the schedule hereto attached, or added thereto by acceptance notices, as therein provided, to faithfully perform such duties as may…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Goshert v. WirthWashington Supreme Court · 1924
- Hays v. PeaveyWashington Supreme Court · 1906
- Sunset Motor Co. v. WoodruffWashington Supreme Court · 1924
3Cited by6 opinions
- Noble v. MartinWashington Supreme Court · 1937
- Miller v. Sisters of St. FrancisWashington Supreme Court · 1940
- Washington Fish & Oyster Co. v. G. P. Halferty & Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1954
- Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Port of SeattleCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1939
- Bermúdez v. RiveraSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1946
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.