Legal Opinion

Harding v. Ohio Casualty Insurance

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided March 10, 1950No. 34,974PublishedCited by 54 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Peterson, Justice.

Action to recover damages for malicious interference with plaintiff’s business. Defendants’ demurrers to the amended and supplemental complaint upon the grounds that the facts stated therein were not sufficient to constitute a cause of action were sustained. Plaintiff appeals.

The questions for decision are:(1) Whether a paid surety acting singly has the right to withdraw as surety from a bond, where it does so with malicious motives ;(2) Whether an agent is liable in tort for an act not constituting a separate tort such as assault, conversion, and the like, where the act is…

2Cases cited47 opinions

  1. Beardsley v. . KilmerNew York Court of Appeals · 1923
  2. Bohn Manufacturing Co. v. HollisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
  3. Tuttle v. BuckSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1909
  4. Thomas v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1907
  5. Greyhound Corp. v. Commercial Casualty InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1940

42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by54 opinions

  1. Gaming Corporation of America Golden Nickel Casinos, Inc. v. Dorsey & Whitney, a Partnership, in Re Dorsey & Whitney, a PartnershipCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1996
  2. Estate of Heiser v. Islamic Republic of IranDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2006
  3. Noble Systems Corp. v. Alorica Central, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2008
  4. In Re Enron Corp. Securities, Derivative & ERISADistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2003
  5. James R. Anderson, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Douglas County Dennis Nagle, Appellees/cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1993

49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API