State Ex Rel. Hagquist v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtMcBRIDE, J.
For the purposes of this case, it may be conceded, although not herein decided, that the relator and his assignors loaned the sums of money to the Scandia Company as claimed in the complaint, and that said moneys, as alleged, were actually expended by that company in paying for labor, materials and supplies used by it in the performance of Job No. 15.
The sole question here discussed is: Is the money so borrowed and expended within the intent of the bond and within the provisions of the statute so as to enable the relator to collect the money so loaned in the name of the state? The state is…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Puget Sound State Bank v. GallucciWashington Supreme Court · 1914
- Fitzgerald v. NealOregon Supreme Court · 1924
- Kendall v. Travelers' Protective Ass'nOregon Supreme Court · 1918
- Clatsop County ex rel. Hildebrand v. FeldschauOregon Supreme Court · 1921
- Multnomah County v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1918
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- DeLong Corporation v. Oregon State Highway Com'nDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1964
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Thomlinson-Arkwright Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1943
- State Ex Rel. Farmers State Bank v. Ed Cox & SonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1965
- United Contracting Co. v. DubyOregon Supreme Court · 1930
- First National Bank of Chisholm v. O'NeilSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.