Legal Opinion

Haddock Construction Co. v. Wilber

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided May 8, 1946PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKelly, J.

For the purpose of securing the plaintiff from any loss or damage by reason of the failure of the defendant Fred S. Wilber, to carry out the terms of his subcontract, the defendant Fred S. Wilber, and the defendant Saint Paul-Mercury Indemnity Company made, executed and delivered to plaintiff their bond and undertaking by which they bound themselves jointly aud severally unto the plaintiff in the sum of $32,763.00.

This bond contains the following provisions:

“The foregoing obligation, however, is limited by the following express conditions, the performance of each of which shall be a condition…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. American Surety Company v. PaulySupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  2. George A. Hormel & Co. v. American Bonding Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
  3. Greenwich Bank v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co. of HartfordNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
  4. Hoffman v. Employer's Liability Assurance Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1934
  5. Duke v. National Surety Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1924

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. BAYER & MINGOLLA CONSTRUCTION CO. INC. v. DeschenesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1965
  2. RC WALTERS COMPANY, INC. v. DeBowerNebraska Supreme Court · 1974

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

Powered by the Exa API