Leatherby Ins. Co. v. City of Tustin
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
McDANIEL, J.
—The controversy here before us is between a bonding company and the City of Tustin over $2,166.42 plus costs of $13 and attorneys’ fees awarded to Tustin on its cross-complaint. At issue essentially is the difference between a contract of indemnity and one of surety. In our view the trial court erred in opting to treat the contract involved as one of indemnity. The judgment will be modified therefore to reflect this view and, as modified, will be affirmed.
Going back to when the City of Tustin (Tustin) was engaged in widening First Street between the Newport Freeway and…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Anderson v. Pacific BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Somers v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.California Supreme Court · 1923
- United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. OAK GROVE UNION SCH. DIST. OF SONOMA CTY.California Court of Appeal · 1962
- Goodman v. SeverinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
3Cited by17 opinions
- Cates Construction, Inc. v. Talbot PartnersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
- In Re Estate of LashSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2001
- General Insurance v. Mammoth Vista Owners' Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985
- Contractors Labor Pool, Inc. v. Westway Contractors, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1997
- People v. Southern Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1983
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.