Legal Opinion

Ganley v. City of Pipestone

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 12, 1923No. 22,968PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Taylor, C.

In July, 191G, plaintiffs, a copartnership doing business under the firm name of Ganley Construction Company, entered into a contract with the city of Pipestone to pave certain streets in that city for the sum of $55,264.42 and executed the statutory bond to secure the performance of their contract and the payment of all claims for labor and material furnished therefor with defendant casualty company as surety thereon. Shortly thereafter they made an arrangement with defendant bank by which they opened an account with the bank in the name of J. H. & J. S. Ganley, and agreed to…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Columbia Digger Co. v. SparksCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1915
  2. Crane Co. v. Pacific Heat & Power Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Bross v. McNicholasOregon Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Merchants Insurance v. HerberSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
  5. Hersey v. BennettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1881

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Camdenton Consolidated School District No. 6 Ex Rel. W. H. Powell Lumber Co. v. New York Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1937
  2. Standard Oil Co. v. DaySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
  3. Maryland Casualty Co. v. DupreeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1931
  4. Barrett Bros. Co. v. County of St. LouisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
  5. Dickson v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1928

19 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