National Surety Co. v. Johnson
Citation | 115 Or. 624,239 P. 538 |
Parties | NATIONAL SURETY CO. v. JOHNSON. |
Decision Date | 29 September 1925 |
Court | Supreme Court of Oregon |
Department 1.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Multnomah County; Robert G. Morrow Judge.
Action by the National Surety Company against J. Harris Johnson. Decree for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
A. G. Barry, of Portland (Bert W. Henry and Griffith, Leiter & Allen, all of Portland, on the brief), for appellant.
Martin L. Pipes, of Portland (George A. Pipes and John M. Pipes both of Portland, on the brief), for respondent.
Apprehending that it would need sureties in its future contracts with municipal corporations and the like, a corporation called the Consolidated Contract Company, with the defendant, J. Harris Johnson, and others not appearing here as comakers, executed and delivered to the plaintiff their joint and several contract under seal, whereby they agreed to pay premiums on all bonds to be thereafter executed by the plaintiff here for the contract company, covenanting that the liability formulated by the instrument would continue until all other obligations had been discharged, and principally:
"That we will at all times indemnify and keep indemnified the company, and hold and save it harmless from and against any and all demands, liabilities, and expenses of whatsoever kind or nature, including counsel and attorney's fees, which it shall at any time sustain or incur by reason or in consequence of having executed such bonds and undertakings, and that we will pay over, reimburse and make good to the company, its successors or assigns, all sums and amounts of money which the company or its representatives shall pay or cause to be paid or become liable to pay under its obligation upon such instruments, or as charges and expenses of whatsoever kind or nature, including counsel and attorneys' fees, by reason of the execution thereof, or in connection with any litigation, investigation, or other matters connected therewith, such payment to be made to the company as soon as it shall have become liable therefor, whether it shall have paid out said sum or any part thereof or not."
Other provisions of the instrument are here set out:
While this instrument, known in the pleadings as Exhibit B was still in force and effect, the plaintiff here executed a bond with the Consolidated Contract Company to the city of Portland, with conditions as follows:
This last undertaking is known as Exhibit "A" in the pleadings. After averring the execution of the two instruments thus described, the complaint charges:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Fulton Ins. Co. v. White Motor Corp.
...has not been established by a judgment, facts establishing it must be pleaded and proved in the indemnity action. National Surety Co. v. Johnson, 115 Or. 624, 239 P. 538 (1925); Aetna Freight Lines, Inc. v. R. C. Tway Company, supra; Nelson v. Sponberg, supra. Here it is alleged only that t......
-
HARTFORD ACCIDENT AND INDEMNITY COMPANY v. Payne, Civ. No. 63-351.
...Automobile Ins. Co., 219 Or. 110, 115, 341 P.2d 110, 346 P.2d 643, 76 A. L.R.2d 485 (1959). For that matter, National Surety Co. v. Johnson, 115 Or. 624, 239 P. 538 (1925), and New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Terrall, 165 Or. 390, 107 P.2d 843 (1940), may be more in point. If California law a......
- Speight v. Simonsen
-
Oregon-Washington R. & Nav. Co. v. Reid
...... Company of St. Paul, Minn., plaintiff herein, was named as. surety. After the mandate in the law action was entered on. April 1, 1936, the judgment debtors two ...175, 294 P. 347;. Weinstein v. Mullen, 116 Or. 549, 240 P. 879;. National Surety Co. v. Johnson, 115 Or. 624, 239 P. 538. What appellants' evidence may be at the ......