County of Audrain et al. v. Walker et al., 25296.

Decision Date31 October 1941
Docket NumberNo. 25296.,25296.
Citation155 S.W.2d 251
PartiesCOUNTY OF AUDRAIN, MISSOURI, AT THE RELATION AND TO THE USE OF FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MEXICO, MISSOURI, A CORPORATION, RESPONDENT, v. JAMES C. WALKER, DOING BUSINESS AS ACME COMTRACTING COMPANY, AND THE FIDELITY AND CASUALTY COMPANY OF NEW YORK, A CORPORATION, DEFENDANTS, THE FIDELITY AND CASUALTY COMPANY OF NEW YORK, A CORPORATION, APPELLANT.
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Audrain County. Hon. W.C. Hughes, Judge.

REVERSED.

George A. Hodgman and Robert S. Lindsey for appellant.

(1) 95 Am. Jur. 59; 74 A.L.R. 523; United States v. Rundle, 107 Fed. 227, 52 L.R.A. 505; Farmers Bank v. Hayes et al., 58 Fed. (2d) 35; Maryland Cas. Co. v. Board of Water Com'rs of City of Dunkirk, 66 Fed. (2d) 730, 290 U.S. 702, 54 S. Ct. 34, 78 L. Ed. 603; Prairie State Nat'l Bank v. U.S., 164 U.S. 227, 17 S. Ct. 142, 41 L. Ed. 412; Hardaway v. Nat'l Surety Co., 211 U.S. 552, 29 S. Ct. 202, 53 L. Ed. 321; So. Surety Co. v. J.R. Holden Land & Lbr. Co., 14 Fed. (2d) 411; United States v. D.L. Taylor Co. (D.C.), 268 Fed. 635, 645; First Nat'l Bank of Chrisholm v. O'Neil et al., 175 Minn. 258, 223 N.W. 298; First Nat'l Bank of Aitkins v. Hagquist et al., 177 Minn. 194, 225 N.W. 11; Norton v. Maryland Cas. Co. et al., 182 Ark. 609, 32 S.W. (2d) 172; American Bank & Trust Co. v. Langston et al., 180 Ark. 643, 22 S.W. (2d) 381; Peoples Nat'l Bank v. So. Surety Co., 105 Cal. App. 731, 288 Pac. 827; Cadenasso v. Antonelle, 127 Cal. 382, 59 Pac. 765; State to Use of So. Maryland Nat'l Bank of La Plata v. Nat'l Surety Co., 126 Md. 290, 94 Atl. 913; New Amsterdam Cas. Co. v. State, 147 Md. 554, 128 Atl. 641; R.L. Snelson & Co. v. R.G. Hill & Co., 196 N.C. 494, 146 S.E. 135; Wachovia Bank & Trust Co. et al. v. F. Mulligan Const. Co. et al., 200 N.C. 304, 156 S.E. 491; Murchison Nat'l Bank v. Clark, 192 N.C. 403, 135 S.E. 123; Miller v. Banner et al., 163 La. 332, 111 So. 776; Oliver Const. Co. v. Crawford, 142 Miss. 490, 107 So. 877; Employers Cas. Co. v. Rockwall County, 120 Tex. 441, 35 S.W. (2d) 690; Lion Bonding & Surety Co. v. First State Bank (Tex.), 194 S.W. 1012; U.S.F. & G. Co. v. Henderson Co. (Tex. Civ. App.), 253 S.W. 835; People v. Southern Surety Co., 76 Colo. 141, 230 Pac. 397; State ex rel. Hagquist v. U.S.F. & G. Co., 125 Ore. 13, 265 Pac. 775; Weiser Loan & Trust Co. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 125 Ore. 195, 265 Pac. 782; Maryland Cas. Co. v. Philbrick & Nicholson, Inc., et al., 147 Wash. 277, 266 Pac. 142; J.F. Tolton Inv. Co. v. Maryland Cas. Co. et al., 77 Utah, 226, 293 Pac. 611; First Nat'l Bank of Eufaula v. So. Surety Co., 61 Okla. 308, 161 Pac. 539; Rockwell Bros. & Co. v. Keatley, 51 Okla. 783, 152 Pac. 449; Carr Hardware Co. v. Chicago Bond. & Surety Co., 190 Iowa, 1320, 181 N.W. 680; Title Guar. & Sur. Co. v. State, 61 Ind. App. 268, 109 N.E. 237, 111 N.E. 19; State ex rel. So. Sur. Co. v. Schlesinger, 114 Ohio St. 323, 151 N.E. 177, 45 A.L.R. 371; Fulghum v. State, 94 Fla. 273, 114 So. 367; Peoples Nat'l Bank v. Corse (Tenn.), 182 S.W. 917; Mass. Bond. and Ins. Co. v. Ripley County Bank et al., 208 Mo. App. 560, 237 S.W. 182; Lincoln County v. Du Pont de Nemours et al., 224 Mo. App. 1183, 32 S.W. (2d) 292. (2) 6 C.J.S. 1047, 1050, 1101, 1104; 60 C.J. 694 et seq., 817; 18 R.C.L. 925; 25 R.C.L. 1312, 1323 et seq., 1374; Stearns, Law of Suretyship (4 Ed.), p. 467; Suddath v. Gallaher et al., 126 Mo. 393, 28 S.W. 880; Grady v. O'Reilly et al., 116 Mo. 346, 22 S.W. 798; McKenzie v. Missouri Stables, 225 Mo. App. 64, 34 S.W. (2d) 136; Jacobs et al. v. Webster et al., 199 Mo. App. 604, 205 S.W. 530; Neodesha Nat'l Bank v. Russell et al., 109 Kan. 562, 200 Pac. 281; Union School Dist. No. 3, Lincoln County, v. Cloepfil et al., 112 Kan. 188, 210 Pac. 192; Hess & Skinner Eng. Co. et al. v. Turney et al., 110 Tex. 148, 216 S.W. 621; Employers Cas. Co. v. Rockwell County, 120 Tex. 441, 35 S.W. (2d) 690; Employers Cas. Co. et al. v. Wolfe City et al., 119 Tex. 552, 25 S.W. (2d) 320; Northwestern Cas. & Sur. Co. v. First Nat'l Bank of Madisonville et al. (Tex.), 36 S.W. (2d) 535; Verschoyle et al. v. Holifield et al. (Tex.), 123 S.W. (2d) 878; Lion Bond. & Sur. Co. v. First State Bank (Tex.), 194 S.W. 1012; Bank of Bienville v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland, 172 La. 687, 135 So. 26; State ex rel. So. Surety Co. v. Schlesinger, etc., et al., 114 Ohio St. 323, 151 N.E. 177; First National Bank of Chisholm v. O'Neil et al., 175 Minn. 258, 223 N.W. 298; First Nat. Bank of Aitkins v. Hagquist et al., 177 Minn. 194, 225 N.W. 11; Prairie State Bank v. U.S., 164 U.S. 227, 17 Sup. Ct. 142, 41 L. Ed. 412; Henningsen v. U.S.F. & G. Co., 208 U.S. 404, 28 Sup. Ct. 389, 52 L. Ed. 547; Hardaway v. Nat. Surety Co., 211 U.S. 552, 28 Sup. Ct. 202, 53 L. Ed. 321; Farmers Bank v. Hoyer et al., 58 Fed. (2d) 35; Lovingood et al. v. Butler Const. Co., 100 Fla. 252, 131 So. 126; Mass. Bond. & Ins. Co. v. Ripley County Bank, 208 Mo. App. 560, 237 S.W. 182; Lincoln County v. DuPont de Nemours & Co. et al., 224 Mo. App. 1183, 32 S.W. (2d) 292. (3) Sec. 2890, Sessions Acts 1933, p. 179; R.S. 1929, sec. 2891; Keane v. Strodtman, Sheriff, 323 Mo. 513, 18 S.W. (2d) 896; Kansas City, Mo., v. J.I. Case Threshing Machine Co. et al., 337 Mo. 913, 87 S.W. (2d) 195; State ex rel. v. Smith (Mo.), 111 S.W. (2d) 513. Labor, material, and laborers and materialmen are ordinarily nontechnical words, which are to be given the meaning commonly attributed to them, and when this is done, the terms do not embody money loaned or commercial money-lending banks. O'Malley v. Continental Life Ins. Co., 335 Mo. 1115, 75 S.W. (2d) 837; State ex rel. City of St. Louis v. Caulfield et al., 333 Mo. 270, 62 S.W. (2d) 818; Betz v. Kansas City So. Ry. Co., 314 Mo. 390, 284 S.W. 455; State v. Platner, 283 Mo. 83, 222 S.W. 767; Wiss v. Royal Ind. Co., 219 Mo. App. 568, 282 S.W. 164; State ex rel. and to use of Worthmann v. Gillioz et al. (Mo. App.), 60 S.W. (2d) 696; Mo. State Highway Commission v. Coopers Const. Service Co. (Mo. App.), 268 S.W. 701; Kansas City to use of Mullins v. McDonald et al., 80 Mo. App. 444; Board of Education v. U.S.F. & G., 155 Mo. App. 109, 134 S.W. 18; Berger Mfg. Co. v. Lloyd et al., 209 Mo. 681, 108 S.W. 52; Wallace et al. v. Woods, 340 Mo. 452, 102 S.W. (2d) 91; In re Costello's Estate, 338 Mo. 673, 92 S.W. (2d) 723; State ex rel. Ferguson-Wellston Bus Co. v. Public Service Com. of Mo., 332 Mo. 283, 58 S.W. (2d) 312; 50 C.J. 948; Geller Ward & Hasner Hdwe. Co. v. Trust Co. of St. Louis County (Mo. App.), 234 S.W. 1019; Hilton v. Universal Const. Co., 202 Mo. App. 672, 260 S.W. 1034; City of St. Louis v. Hill O'Meara Const. Co. et al., 175 Mo. App. 555, 158 S.W. 98; City of St. Louis to use of Stone Creek Brick Co. v. Kaplan-McGowan et al. (Mo. App.), 108 S.W. (2d) 987; Potts v. Davis et al. (Mo. App.), 24 S.W. (2d) 1047. (4) Mass. Bonding and Ins. Co. v. Ripley County Bank, 208 Mo. App. 560, 237 S.W. 182; Prairie State Nat'l Bank v. U.S., 164 U.S. 227, 17 S. Ct. 142, 41 L. Ed. 412; Southern Surety Co. v. J.R. Holden Land and Lumber Co., 14 Fed. (2d) 411; Hardaway v. Nat'l Surety Co., 211 U.S. 404, 28 S. Ct. 389, 52 L. Ed. 547. (5) Standard Acc. Ins. Co. v. Federal National Bank, 112 Fed. (2d) 692; Western Casualty & Surety Co. v. Lash (S.D.), 290 N.W. 316; Sadler v. Glenn et al. (Miss.), 199 So. 305; U.S.F. & G. v. John R. Alley & Co. (Okla.), 34 Fed. Supp. 604; Murphy v. National Paving Co. (Wis.), 281 N.W. 705; Cox v. New England Equitable Ins. Co., 247 Fed. 955; Moran v. Guardian Casualty Co., 76 Fed. (2d) 439; Claiborne Parrish School Board v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland, 40 Fed. (2d) 577; Exchange State Bank v. Federal Surety Co., 28 Fed. (2d) 485; Maryland Casualty Co. v. Dulaney Lumber Co., 23 Fed. (2d) 378; Central State Bank v. U.S.F. & G. Co., 9 Fed. (2d) 326, 46 Sup. Ct. 353; First National Bank in Winfield, Kansas v. Fidelity & Deposit Co., 65 Fed. (2d) 959; Riverview State Bank v. Wentz, 34 Fed. (2d) 419.

Rodgers, Buffington & Adams and Cullen, Storckman & Coil for respondent.

(1) The lender of money to a principal contractor for the purpose of enabling said contractor to pay for material and labor, which money is used for the payment of material and labor, may recover in a suit upon a performance bond executed by said principal contractor and his surety. Camdenton Consol. School Dist. No. 6 ex rel. Powell Lbr. Co., a Corp., v. New York Cas. Co., 340 Mo. 1070, 104 S.W. (2d) 319; School District No. 18 v. McClure (Mo.), 224 S.W. 83. (2) The respondent bank is a proper party to maintain an action on a public works contractor's performance bond. Camdenton Consol. School Dist. No. 6 ex rel. Powel Lbr. Co., a Corp., v. New York Casualty Co., supra; School District No. 18 v. McClure, supra. (3) Respondent bank was entitled to recover judgment herein irrespective of Secs. 2890, 2891, R.S. Mo. 1929. The bond executed by defendants in the case at bar. (4) Defendant surety company is entitled to no credits on the judgment rendered by the trial court.

MAYFIELD, S.J.

This is a suit brought against a performance bond given by one James C. Walker, an individual doing business as Acme Contracting Company, as principal, and the Fidelity and Casualty Company of New York, a corporation, as surety, for the faithful performance of a building contract made by Walker with the board of trustees for Audrain County, Missouri, for the erection of a Nurses' Home at Mexico, Missouri. Judgment of the trial court was against Walker and his surety, but only the surety appealed here. The action is brought at the relation of the First National Bank of Mexico, and by it the bank seeks in its own right, and not as an assignee or subrogee, to recover on such bond. For purposes of designation and identification the respective ...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT