Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Court: us supreme court Page 1 of about 9,200 results (0.101 seconds)

Apr 20 1914 (FN)

German Alliance Ins. Co. Vs. Lewis

Court : US Supreme Court

..... the constitution, he also has the right to name the wage for his labor and to fix the terms of contracts of indemnity, whether they be contracts of indorsement or suretyship or contracts of indemnity against loss by fire, flood, or accident. in view of what judge cooley calls the general supposition that "the ..... have themselves fixed this charge, and this makes most strongly in favor of their right to continue to agree upon the price of a private contract of indemnity against loss by fire. the act now under review not only takes property without due process of law, but it unequally and arbitrarily selects ..... "the number of transactions do not give the business any other character than magnitude." the character of insurance, therefore, as a private and personal contract of indemnity has not been changed by page 233 u. s. 423 its magnitude or by the fact that more policies and for greater amounts are now ..... be regulated by statute. and such laws are not without english precedent. for while no statute ever before attempted to fix the price of a contract of indemnity, * yet under a parliament that sat as a perpetual constitutional convention, with power page 233 u. s. 421 to pass bills of attainder ..... are classed among those "strictly private." leavenworth county v. miller, 7 kan. 520. the fact that insurance is a strictly private and a personal contract of indemnity puts it on the extreme outside limit, and removes it as far as any business can be from those that are in their nature public. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 09 1956 (FN)

Ryan Stevedoring Co., Inc. Vs. Pan-atlantic Corp.

Court : US Supreme Court

..... footnote 1 ] precludes a shipowner from asserting such a liability. 2. the second is whether the liability exists where a contractor, without entering into an express agreement of indemnity, contracts to perform a shipowner's stevedoring operations and the longshoreman's injuries are caused by the contractor's unsafe stowage of the ship's cargo. for the reasons hereafter stated ..... the ss. canton page 350 u. s. 126 victory in the american coastwise trade under a bareboat charter. as evidenced by letters, but without a formal stevedoring contract or an express indemnity agreement, respondent secured, for that year, the agreement of petitioner, ryan stevedoring co., inc., an alabama corporation, to perform all stevedoring operations required by respondent in its ..... rehearing granted, may 16,1955 reargued october 11-12, 1955 decided january 9, 1956 350 u.s. 124 on rehearing syllabus without signing a formal stevedoring contract or an express indemnity agreement, a stevedoring contractor agreed to perform all stevedoring operations required by a shipowner in the latter's coastwise service. under this agreement, the contractor loaded a ..... harmless or to indemnify the shipowner against liability for injuries to petitioner's employees caused by the shipowner's negligence in whole or in part, the contract would have been valid and indemnity could have been obtained. for the longshoremen's act does not forbid employers under it to make independent agreements to indemnify others. but i think .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 15 1989 (FN)

Colonial Amer. Life Ins. Vs. Commissioner

Court : US Supreme Court

..... of the court. the arcane but financially important question before us is whether ceding commissions paid by a reinsurance company to a direct insurer under a contract for indemnity reinsurance are fully deductible in the year tendered, or instead must be amortized over the anticipated life of the reinsurance agreements. i this case involves the ..... reinsurance ceded shall be included in return premiums." thus, to compress petitioner's labyrinthine statutory argument, petitioner should prevail in this case if ceding commissions for indemnity reinsurance are fairly encompassed in either the statutory term "premiums and other consideration arising out of reinsurance ceded" or the regulatory definition "consideration returned to another ..... income] "). our agreement with respondent as to the character of ceding commissions therefore resolves this case, absent some specific statutory provision indicating that ceding commissions for indemnity insurance are an exception to the general rule for which congress has authorized current deduction. petitioner offers three possible sources in subchapter l of such a specific ..... reinsurance agreement, the reinsurer steps into the ceding company's shoes, becoming directly liable to the policyholders and receiving all premiums directly. in contrast, under an indemnity reinsurance agreement, the reinsurer assumes no direct liability, instead reimbursing the ceding company for a specified percentage of the claims and expenses attributable to the risks that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 09 1970 (FN)

United States Vs. Seckinger

Court : US Supreme Court

..... v. anaconda american brass co., 43 wis.2d 36, 168 n.w.2d 112 (1969) (indemnitor not liable for such portion of total liability attributable to act of indemnitee unless indemnity contract by express provision and strict construction so provides); cases collected in annot., 175 a.l.r. 8, 29-38 (1948). other cases do not require that indemnification for the indemnitee ..... to permit indemnification of the government for its own negligence, which had substantially contributed to the injury. held: though the government, under the contract clause involved here, cannot recover for its own negligence, it is entitled to indemnity on a comparative basis to the extent that it can prove that respondent's negligence contributed to the employee's injuries. pp. 397 u ..... court's opinion to the contrary, we do not deal here with "common law or statutory rules of contribution or indemnity." [ footnote 2/4 ] the only question the court decides is the meaning of the words of a clause in a government contract. [ footnote 2/5 ] i think the page 397 u. s. 220 meaning attributed to that clause today is as ..... evidence was presented to the district court. that court merely adhered to the construction of the contract that had been adopted by the court of appeals, 153 f.2d 605 (c.a.2d cir.1946), namely, that the united states was entitled to full indemnity from a stevedoring contractor although both the united states and the contractor were found to have been .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 14 1932 (FN)

Aetna Cas. and Sur. Co. Vs. Phoenix Nat. Bank and Trust Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

..... american surety co. v. greek catholic union, 284 u. s. 563 . if such was respondent's object, it should have taken from petitioner not a contract of indemnity, as it did here, but one to pay to it all amounts disbursed on forged checks. reversed. * carroll's ky.stat. (1930) 3720b-124, ..... 284 u.s. 608, to review the reversal of a judgment in favor of the above-named petitioner in an action by the bank on a contract of indemnity. page 285 u. s. 211 mr. justice stone delivered the opinion of the court. this suit was brought by respondent, a national bank, ..... respondent could enforce them with a similar lack of effect upon its right to recover from petitioner. in either case, petitioner's contract would be converted from one of indemnity, as stipulated, into an unqualified obligation to repay to the bank the amounts which it was induced to pay by the forgeries ..... the loss. that privilege was a necessary incident to petitioner's contract, for only by resort to it could the character of the contract as indemnity be preserved. it is both the object and the justification of subrogation that it makes exact indemnity the measure of the liability. see standard marine insurance co., ..... forgeries, be recredited to its account. the respondent, in turn, asked payment of that amount of petitioner in satisfaction of its liability on the indemnity bond. petitioner, while admitting liability if respondent was not authorized to charge the depositor with the loss, insisted that the depositor was so chargeable .....

Tag this Judgment!

1874

Moran Vs. Prather

Court : US Supreme Court

..... that the purchaser had assumed the payment of existing debts against her. 2. the right of a partner to sign the firm name to a contract of indemnity in favor of third persons must be strictly proved, but it need not necessarily to be proved by a written authority to him. error to ..... referred to debts to accrue after the 20th of september, 1869 (the date of the agreement of indemnity), but to debts which, then existing, might be thereafter presented -- all claims and demands, in short, which had been contracted on account of the boat and for which he, prather, was liable as owner. the defendants, ..... arose and were brought against the steamer and were existing prior to the 20th day of september, 1869, and were embraced under the said agreement of indemnity given by moran & noble; that the petitioner having been thus obliged to pay the same, the said moran & noble under said agreement were bound ..... consideration for the petitioner's making sale of so very valuable as boat for the small sum of $6,000, executed in this form the instrument of indemnity which he required: "new orleans, september 20, 1869" "we, the undersigned, of the city and state aforesaid, do hereby bind ourselves and our ..... this, and in order to be sure of protection against all the debts existing against the steamboat at that time the petitioner demanded an agreement of indemnity from a commercial firm in new orleans named moran & noble; that certain persons whose names appear to it had, by the instrument first given below .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 02 1891 (FN)

Chicago, St.L. and N.O. R. Co. Vs. Pullman Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

..... the general rule of law (and it is obvious justice) is that where there is a contract of indemnity -- it matters not whether it is a marine policy, or a policy against fire on land, or any other contract of indemnity -- and a loss happens, anything which reduces or diminishes that loss reduces or diminishes the amount ..... j.law 409: "notwithstanding such payment, an action will lie by the insured against the railroad company. the insurance is to be treated as a mere indemnity, and the insured and insurer regarded as one person; therefore payment by the insurer before suit brought cannot affect the right of action." to the same ..... and if the amount recovered from the railroad company, increased by the sum collected from the insurance companies, was more than sufficient for its just indemnity, the excess would be held by it in trust for the insurance companies. the inquiry in this action is as to the amount for which ..... rights of the insured, and could, in the name of the insured or in their joint names, maintain an action against the railroad company for indemnity if that company was liable to the insured for the loss of the cars. the acceptance of a given amount from the insurance companies in ..... were subrogated to the rights of the insured, and could in its name or in their joint names, maintain an action against the railroad company for indemnity, if the latter was liable to the insured for the loss of the cars -- this because the liability of the railroad company was, in legal effect .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 11 1926 (FN)

Trusler Vs. Crooks

Court : US Supreme Court

..... option, the transaction could be carried out only through and by members of exchanges open to sales for future delivery. the stipulated facts reveal the cost, terms, and use of "indemnity" contracts, together with their relation to boards of trade, and indicate quite plainly that 3 was not intended to produce revenue, but to prohibit all such ..... to recover two hundred dollars paid for internal revenue stamps which, after due protest, he affixed to a written "privilege or option for a contract for the sale of grain in the form commonly known as an indemnity," as required by 3 of the "future trading act," approved august 24, 1921. 42 stat. 187, c. 86. if, as he insists, that section ..... trade, in consideration of one dollar, signed and delivered the following privilege or option, in the form commonly known as an "indemnity," addressed to r. f. teichgraeber, for a contract for the sale of grain: "i will sell one thousand bushels of contract grade wheat at $1.11 1/4 per bushel, for delivery during may, 1924, same to be delivered in regular ..... stamps. for many years prior to august 24, 1921, members of grain exchanges bought and sold in large quantities agreements for contracts for purchase or sale of grain subject to acceptance within a definite time thereafter, commonly known as "indemnities." when the holder of one of these elected to exercise his rights, the specified amount of grain was bought or sold on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 01 1915 (FN)

United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co. Vs. Riefler

Court : US Supreme Court

..... of indemnity or guaranty? (2) or was it merely an offer to become indemnitors or guarantors, requiring notice of acceptance by the company, in accordance with davis ..... liability of defendants on a bond of indemnity to a surety company, are stated in the opinion. page 239 u. s. 23 mr. justice holmes delivered the opinion of the court. the ..... a parol offer in the same terms, the company, by becoming surety, would have furnished the consideration that would have converted the offer into a contract; but notice is held necessary in davis sewing mach. co. v. richards. if it had been a covenant, the company's act would have ..... was so delivered and was relied upon by the bonding company in issuing its bond, held, in this case, to have been a completed contract on the delivery thereof to the bonding company which was not required to notify the parties thereto of its acceptance. the facts, which involve the ..... indemnity bond. the defendants in error received no pecuniary consideration for their act, and were not notified of the acceptance of their bond or of the execution of the other by the company. the questions propounded are: page 239 u. s. 24 "(1) was the instrument which was signed by riefler and hall, and relied on by the company a completed contract .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 04 1937 (FN)

Kuehner Vs. Irving Trust Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

..... 299 u. s. 453 if the bankruptcy act was to be broadened to embrace reorganization of corporate debtors, the wisdom of relieving them of continuing liability for rent or under contracts of indemnity was apparent. and if the landlords' claims were to be discharged in the reorganization, they must be admitted to participation on an equitable basis with other claims in shaping ..... trust co. v. irving trust company, [ footnote 2 ] that the broad definition of creditors in 77b gives the petitioners a provable claim for breach of the debtor's covenant of indemnity. the section, however, limits the amount for which such a claim may be allowed. the relevant provision, so far as applicable to petitioners' claim is: "the claim of a landlord ..... provided by the statute. committees representing preferred stockholders and debenture holders objected to allowance of the claim in any amount, asserting the petitioners could not sue on the covenant of indemnity under the state law until the expiration of the term and, having no presently enforceable claim under state law, had none in the reorganization proceeding. the petitioners amended their pleading ..... court of appeals for the second circuit syllabus 1. section 77b of the bankruptcy act provides that, in proceedings to reorganize a bankrupt corporation, the claim of a landlord for indemnity under a covenant contained in a lease which has been rejected by the trustee in bankruptcy "shall be treated as a claim ranking on a parity with debts which would .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //