Legal Opinion
De Witt v. Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. Co.
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided April 8, 1926No. 1919PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHiggins, J.
J. C. Ray was a building contractor. To indemnify appellee upon bonds which it might execute as surety for Ray, the appellants De Witt, Crawford, Pope, and Sherwood executed and delivered to ap-pellee' a bond, the pertinent provisions of which read:
“1. That we will immediately pay the said surety at its office, in the city of Boston, Mass., or at Dallas, Tex., as it may elect, any and all premiums due or to become due on those bonds.
“11. That we will at all times indemnify and save the said surety harmless from and against every and all claim, demand, liability, cost, charge, counsel fee,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Coalson v. HolmesTexas Supreme Court · 1922
- Ray v. W. W. Kimball Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1918
- Randals v. GreenCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1924
- Eyres v. Crockett State BankCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1920
- Hood v. AskeyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1925
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Farmers' Seed & Gin Co. v. BrooksTexas Supreme Court · 1935
- Dees v. McDonaldCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1931
- Browne v. Heid Bros., Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1928
- Austin v. BeardenCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1929