Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Court: us supreme court Year: 1934 Page 1 of about 41 results (0.059 seconds)

Feb 05 1934 (FN)

Manhattan Properties, Inc. Vs. Irving Trust Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-05-1934

..... act of reentry, which must occur at a date subsequent to the filing of the petition. obviously this contract of indemnity is not breached by bankruptcy, and cannot be breached until the duty of indemnifying the landlord arises. that obligation cannot be complete until the expiration of the original term. there ..... a damage claim against the estate, this cannot be true as respects these independent covenants of indemnity. for here, the landlord does not rely upon the destruction of his contract by the bankruptcy; he initiates a new contract of indemnity by the affirmative step of reentry. and this new contract comes into being not by virtue of the bankruptcy proceeding, but by force of the ..... by the congress, but there is no evidence to support this view and it is inconsistent with the longstanding contrary judicial construction. it remains to consider the effect of the indemnity covenants in the leases. these do not provide for liquidation of damages ( compare wm. filene's sons co. v. weed, supra ), nor indeed for any right to damages for breach ..... can be no debt provable in bankruptcy arising out of a contract which becomes effective only at the claimant's option and after the inception of the proceedings, the fulfillment of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 03 1934 (FN)

irving Trust Co. Vs. A. W. Perry, Inc.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Dec-03-1934

..... petitioner's contention is that, inasmuch as claims for future rent, or for damages for the breach of the covenant to pay rent, or claims upon contracts of indemnity conditioned upon reentry by the landlord subsequent to bankruptcy, were there held not provable, it logically follows that a claim for stipulated damages for page 293 ..... a penalty, and was therefore enforceable. see wm. filene's sons co. v. weed, 245 u. s. 597 . we concur in the view that the contract, as its terms were interpreted and applied, supports a provable claim for the stipulated damages. the judgment of the circuit court of appeals is affirmed. [ footnote 1 ..... the filing of the petition. the claim is not for rent reserved or upon the lease as such, but is founded upon an independent express contract, and hence within the very words of 63(a)(4). the circuit court construed the stipulation as an agreement on the part of the tenant ..... for the balance of the term. 2. the claim is not for rent reserved or upon the lease as such, but is one founded upon an independent express contract, and is within the very word of 63(a)(4) of the bankruptcy act. manhattan properties, inc. v. irvin trust co., 291 u. s. 320 ..... u. s. 311 breach of the lease may not be proved. we hold otherwise. by the terms of the contract, the filing of the petition in bankruptcy .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 09 1934 (FN)

Hartford Acc. and Indem. Co. Vs. Delta and Pine Land Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-09-1934

..... , loss or injury of something in which the assured or other party has an interest, as an indemnity therefor, and it shall be unlawful for any company to make any contract of insurance upon, or concerning any property or interest or lives in this state, or with any ..... state supreme court said: "but clearly, under 5131, code 1930, defining insurance, this indemnity bond is a contract of insurance within the purview of that statute; and, further, it being expressly provided therein that all contracts of insurance on property, lives, or interests in this state shall be deemed to ..... of mississippi by delta & pine land company, a corporation of that state, with its principal place of business therein, against hartford accident & indemnity company, a corporation of connecticut, having its principal place of business in hartford in that state. the declaration alleges that, on or about january ..... company in an action on an indemnity bond. mr. justice roberts delivered the ..... contracts of the forum, regardless of the relative importance of the interests of the forum as contrasted with those created at the place of the contract, conflicts with the guaranties of the fourteenth amendment. p. 292 u. s. 150 . 169 miss. 196 reversed. appeal from a judgment sustaining a recovery from the indemnity .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 05 1934 (FN)

Nebbia Vs. New York

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-05-1934

..... or legislature are correct, or otherwise. the court below refrained from expressing any opinion in that regard, notwithstanding its declaration "that legislative authority to abridge property rights and freedom of contract can be justified only by exceptional circumstances and, even then, by reasonable regulation only, and that legislative conclusions based on findings of fact are subject to judicial review." on the ..... in peace and war, under normal conditions or in emergencies; with cheerful submission to the rule of the supreme court that legislative authority to bridge property rights and freedom of contract can be justified only by exceptional circumstances and, even then, by reasonable regulation only, and that legislative conclusions based on findings of fact are subject to judicial review, we ..... denies due process. notwithstanding the admitted power to correct existing economic ills by appropriate regulation of business, even though an indirect result may be a restriction of the freedom of contract or a modification of charges for services or the price of commodities, the appellant urges that direct fixation of prices is a type of regulation absolutely forbidden. his position ..... sale of farm machinery, advance-rumely co. v. jackson, 287 u. s. 283 ; bonds for performance of building contracts, hartford accident & indemnity co. v. nelson mfg. co., 291 u. s. 352 . [ footnote 30 ] central lumber co. v. south dakota, 226 u. s. 157 . [ footnote 31 ] rast v. van deman & lewis co., 240 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 05 1934 (FN)

Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co. Vs. Nelson Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-05-1934

..... 469. an appeal to this court followed; the surety on the appeal bond joining as appellant with the surety on the bond in suit. hartford accident & indemnity co. v. bunn, supra. page 291 u. s. 358 as to the meaning of the statute now challenged as invalid, the supreme court of ..... must be disregarded so far as persons furnishing labor or material are concerned." an appeal to this court was dismissed for defect of parties. hartford accident & indemnity co. v. bunn, 285 u. s. 169 . in the meantime, the n. o. nelson manufacturing company, the present appellee, had intervened in ..... obligee and principal, there can be no privilege of the surety to contract on better terms. the secondary obligation must follow the primary one and conform to its restraints. the surety has the alternative either to write its indemnities and guaranties upon the only terms permitted to obligee and principal or to ..... but a bond giving narrower protection, or so the surety contends, than the one that had been promised. the bond that was furnished refers to and incorporates the contract between the owner and the builders. it provides that, ..... . by the principal contract, provision was made for the giving of a bond which was to secure materialmen and laborers, as well as the owner. [ footnote 2 ] thereafter, the contractors did furnish a bond for the cost of the building ($316,822) with the hartford accident & indemnity company as surety, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 05 1934 (FN)

Globe Indemnity Co. Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-05-1934

..... 302 reversed. certiorari, 290 u.s. 618, to review a judgment which reversed a judgment for the globe indemnity company in an action against it as surety on a bond securing a construction contract with the united states. the bond was given under the heard act, and the plaintiff relied on its ..... may not be approved by the courts. see illinois surety co. v. united states to use of peeler, supra, 240 u. s. 221 ; consolidated indemnity & insurance co. v. w. a. smoot & co., supra, 57 f.2d 997. a different question would be presented if the department concerned declined ..... it recorded its findings. such a determination would be "final settlement" for purposes of the heard act if payment had preceded action by the comptroller general. consolidated indemnity & insurance co. v. w. a. smoot & co., supra. if, as respondent maintains, this determination may be supplanted by a subsequent settlement by ..... to make final administrative determinations in the executive departments any the less final settlements within the meaning of the heard act than they had been before. consolidated indemnity & insurance co. v. w. a. smoot & co., supra. page 291 u. s. 482 respondent does not directly challenge this conclusion. it ..... indemnity co. v. united states no. 419 argued february 13, 14, 1934 decided march 5, 1934 291 u.s. 476 certiorari to the circuit court of appeals for the third circuit syllabus the heard act, 40 u.s.c. 270, requires that, to secure the performance of a government construction contract .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 02 1934 (FN)

Aschenbrenner Vs. United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-02-1934

..... , they are at least persuasive that meanings which they do not embrace are not common. that the stipulation to be construed is one for double indemnity calls for no different conclusion. it has been page 292 u. s. 86 argued that such a provision contemplates a risk which is comparatively slight ..... new york, 250 mass. 250, 254, 145 n.e. 535; boyd v. royal indemnity co., 120 ohio st. 515, 517, 166 n.e. 580. the phraseology of contracts of insurance is that chosen by the insurer, and the contract in fixed form is tendered to the prospective policyholder, who is often without technical training and ..... the ground that the insured, at the time of the accident, was not a passenger on a common carrier within the meaning of the double indemnity provisions of the policy. a judgment entered upon a verdict for the petitioner for the double liability was reversed by the court of appeals for ..... a policy of accident insurance issued to her husband by respondent, brought this suit in the district court for northern california to recover under the double indemnity provisions of the policy. at the trial, liability was conceded for the single amount stipulated to be paid in the event of the insured's ..... their technical connotation, will be given the meaning that common speech imports. p. 292 u. s. 85 . 3. an accident policy provided for double indemnity if injury were sustained by insured "while a passenger in or on a public conveyance (including the platform, steps or running-board thereof) provided by a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 05 1934 (FN)

Detroit Trust Co. Vs. the Thomas Barlum

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Nov-05-1934

..... , or her freight then pending, in cases of damage occasioned without the owner's privity or knowledge ( norwich co. v. wright, 13 wall. 104; hartford accident & indemnity co. v. southern pacific co., 273 u. s. 207 , 273 u. s. 214 ); the extension, by the act of june 26, 1884, 18, 23 stat ..... of our maritime policy. the ship, "from the moment her keel touches the water," becomes "a subject of admiralty jurisdiction;" she acquires personality; she becomes competent to contract, is individually liable for her obligations, and is responsible for her torts. tucker v. alexandroff, 183 u. s. 426 , 183 u. s. 438 . the ..... as it has been." the significance of this suggestion cannot be overlooked. the fact that mortgages on ships had not been considered to be maritime contracts was not conclusive as to the constitutional authority of the congress to alter or supplement the maritime law in this respect, and thus to extend ..... the owner; that the foundation of the rule was "that the mere mortgage of a ship, other than that of an hypothecated bottomry," was a contract "without any of the characteristics or attendants of a maritime loan," and was made "without reference to navigation or perils of the sea;" that it ..... or page 293 u. s. 36 agent of the vessel, for wages of the crew of the vessel, for general average, and for salvage, including contract salvage." the requirements of subdivision (a) of subsection d which must be met in order to obtain this preferred status are that the mortgage shall be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 05 1934 (FN)

Travelers Protective Assn. Vs. Prinsen

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-05-1934

..... the errand. cudahy packing co. v. parramore, 263 u. s. 418 , 263 u. s. 426 ; bountiful brick co. v. giles, 276 u. s. 154 , 276 u. s. 158 ; voehl v. indemnity ins. co., 288 u. s. 162 . the argument is made that a causal connection between the death and the explosion is not a necessary inference from the facts in evidence ..... fragments of his body being so small that an autopsy was impossible. we are told that, even so, the impact of the engine may have been fatal without more. the contract does not say that the holder of the policy is to have no claim against the insurer if he dies "by reason of" his participation in the carriage of explosives ..... . the contract says that he is to have no claim page 291 u. s. 582 against the insurer if he dies "when" he is participating in the carriage of explosives, just as ..... application, appears to me to obscure, rather than to define, the meaning of the term, and to violate the cardinal principle that, so far as their language reasonably admits, insurance contracts are to be interpreted most favorably to the insured.

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 08 1934 (FN)

Home Building and Loan Assn. Vs. Blaisdell

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-08-1934

..... massachusetts] repeated temporary stay laws gave no real relief; they flattered and deceived the hope of the debtor, exasperating alike him and his creditor. . . ." ". . . [in pennsylvania] in december, 1784, debts contracted before 1777 were made payable in three annual instalments. . . ." "maryland, . . . in 1782, . . . enacted a stay law extending to january, 1784, . . ." "georgia, in august, 1782, ..... the midst of the events of which he speaks, says: "the nonpayment of public debts sometimes inferred a necessity, and always furnished an apology, for not discharging private contracts. confidence between man and man received a deadly wound. public faith being first violated, private engagements lost much of their obligatory force. . . ." "from the combined operation ..... a growing appreciation of public needs and of the necessity of finding ground for a rational compromise between individual rights and public welfare. the settlement and consequent contraction of the public domain, the pressure of a constantly increasing density of population, the interrelation of the activities of our people and the complexity of our economic ..... cases of the marcus brown company and the levy leasing company arose under legislation of new york, and the constitutional provision against the impairment of the obligation of contracts was invoked. the statutes of new york, [ footnote 15 ] declaring that a public emergency existed, directly interfered with the enforcement of covenants for the surrender of .....

Tag this Judgment!


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