Legal Opinion
New Amsterdam Casualty Company v. Lundquist
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided June 2, 1972No. 43047, 43054PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Todd, Justice.
These appeals arise out of two actions brought by a surety to recover from indemnitors the amounts it was required to pay under two contractors’ bonds following default by its principal. In one action (No. 43054), the surety, New Amsterdam Casualty Company, sought to recover from Robert A. Lundquist, Ruth Lundquist, Lyle R. Barker, and Orel A. Barker, amounts it paid to complete the construction of a school. In the other (No. 43047), New Amsterdam, upon being sued by a supplier for payment for materials furnished the principal in construction of a water-treatment plant, brought…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Livingston S. Hiern v. St. Paul-Mercury Indemnity CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1959
- Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. EickhoffSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
- Peterson v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1968
- Boerger v. American General Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1959
- Larson v. Anchor Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Short v. Dairyland Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- United Prairie Bank-Mountain Lake v. Haugen Nutrition & Equipment, LLCSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
- Lucas v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
- Rosenbloom v. FeilerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1981
- Louis Riske and Jerry Riske v. Truck Insurance Exchange, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1974
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.