State v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the district court for Ramsey county to recover $5,947.61 upon defendant’s bond as surety for J. A. MeDevitt. Defendant demurred to the complaint on the ground that the Equitable Surety Company of St. Louis was a necessary party to the action.
Read the full summary
Action in the district court for Ramsey county to recover $5,947.61 upon defendant’s bond as surety for J. A. MeDevitt. Defendant demurred to the complaint on the ground that the Equitable Surety Company of St. Louis was a necessary party to the action. The demurrer was overruled, Haupt, J. Upon the complaint and answer and affidavits of plaintiff’s officers, its motion to strike out the answer as false and sham and for judgment against defendant in the amount demanded was granted, Dickson, J. By stipulation the amount of the judgment was reduced to $4,200. From the judgment entered pursuant…
1Opinion of the CourtHallam, J.
The facts applicable to this case are stated in the opinion in State v. Equitable Surety Company, which precedes this on page 48. Some of the issues are the same as in that case. Two other issues are raised:
*711. Defendant was surety on the bond of Sperling to whom the timber permit was issued. The Equitable Company was surety on the bond of his assignee. The statute provides that, when a permit is assigned and another bond given by the assignee, the original bond remains in full force. G. S. 1913, § 5279. Defendant claims that the last bond becomes the primary security and that no suit can be…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Bartles-Scott Oil Co. v. Western Surety Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
- Central State Bank v. Royal Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Equitable Surety Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1920