Legal Opinion
Gill v. Paysee
Nevada Supreme Court
Decided June 4, 1924No. 2610PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Bond provides surety will save county harmless from loss by breach of contract, not that it will pay contractor's debts. Materialmen and laborers cannot sue on bond not made for their benefit. The few cases holding to contrary are lost in great weight of authority. First M.E. Church v. Isenberg, 92 A. 141; Page on Contracts, sec. 2408; Babcock v. Surety Co., 236 Fed. 340 (distinguishing Peake v. U.S., 16 App. D.C. 415, and Spear v. U.S., 31 App. D.C. 376, in which bond, though defective, provided contractors pay for material); 27 Cyc. 308.
Statute will not be read into bond to create liability…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- People v. . Metropolitan Surety Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1914
- M. H. Walker Realty Co. v. American Surety Co. of New YorkUtah Supreme Court · 1922
- W. P. Fuller & Co. v. Alturas School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1915
- Babcock v. American Surety Co. of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1916
- First Methodist Episcopal Church ex rel. Hall v. IsenbergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Philip Carey Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1926
- Southern Surety Co. v. ChambersOhio Supreme Court · 1926
- General Securities Co. v. HindesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1925
- Lyon County Bank Mortgage Corp. v. TobinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1939