Michaud v. Erickson

122 N.W. 324, 108 Minn. 356, 1909 Minn. LEXIS 713
Supreme Court of Minnesota·Decided July 9, 1909·No. Nos. 16,135—(160)·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Elliott, J.

This is an appeal from an order overruling a general demurrer interposed by the American Bonding Company to each of two causes of action alleged in the complaint. The action was brought by D. H. Michaud and E. S. Warner against Nils Erickson and the American Bonding Company of Baltimore, and the complaint alleges, in substance, as a first cause of action: That on or about the twenty-eighth day of February, 1906, the defendant Erickson and one William. C. Bead, who acted therein on behalf of himself and the plaintiffs and certain other parties, entered into a written contract which contained the following provisions:

“This agreement, made and entered into on this 28th day of February, 1906, by and between W. C. Bead and Nils Erickson, both of St. Paul, Minnesota, witnesseth: The said Erickson, for the consideration hereinafter agreed to be paid him, shall grade the following described parcels of land, located in the city of St. Paul, Bamsey county, Minnesota, namely: All of block 37 of Summit Park addition to said city of St. Paul, except lot one (1) and lots ten (10) to nineteen (19), inclusive, of said block, and shall haul the material excavated for the purposes of said grading and deposit the same as follows: About four thousand (4,000) cubic yards thereof he shall deposit on lots seven (7), eight (8), nine (9), and ten (10), of block twenty-five (25), of said Summit Park addition, namely, the property belonging to said W. C. Bead; about fourteen thousand (14,000) cubic yards thereof he shall haul and deposit on lots six (6), seven (7), and eight (8), of block thirty-nine (39), of said Summit Park addition, namely, the property belonging to Michaud and Warner; and three thousand (3,000) cubic yards, more or less, he shall deposit on the property of Smith and Taylor on the northwest corner of Goodrich and Lexington avenues, namely, * * as directed by the owners. It being understood that the grading of the lots in said block thirty-seven (37) shall be done-in accordance •with the specifications and grade stakes as set by Jens Peterson, engineer, who shall fix the grade to which said property shall be lowered.”

[359] After stating the character of the work, and the amount of consideration, and the manner of its payment, the contract provides that “it is further agreed that said work shall be commenced within ten (10) days from this date and completed within four (4) months,” and that “said Erickson shall at the' time of signing this contract furnish and deliver to said Eead a bond executed by some responsible surety company in the sum of at least one thousand ($1,000) to indemnify the said Eead against any loss for failure on the part of said Erickson to perform this contract.”

The complaint alleges: That on February 28, 1906, the defendant Erickson, as principal, and the American Bonding Company, as surety, executed and delivered to said William C. Eead a written obligation, which is set forth in fidl in the complaint, by the terms of which Erickson and the bonding company became held and bound jointly and severally to William C. Eead in the sum of $1,000, subject to the condition that Erickson should fully and faithfully perform the • said contract with Eead, which is described in the bond, within the time and according to the terms which were prescribed, and to pay as they became due all just claims for labor performed and materials furnished in the execution of the contract, and save the said William C. Eead harmless from all costs, charges, and expenses that may accrue on the doing of the work specified in the contract. That the plaintiffs were at all the times mentioned the owners of lots 6, 7, and 8, in block 39, of Summit Park addition, and part owners in common with William C. Eead and other parties of all of block 37. That Erickson excavated from part of block 37, specified in the contract to be graded, at least twenty-three thousand cubic yards of earth, but diverted and sold for other purposes a large portion thereof, instead of placing the entire amount of earth on said lots 6, 7, and 8. That said lots front on Summit avenue, and are much below grade. That all of said fourteen thousand cubic yards of earth is needed to raise them to the grade conformable to the grade of Summit avenue. That there is a great deficiency of earth in the neighborhood of lots 6, 7, and 8, and that it will be impossible to secure and place on said lots the quantity of earth equal to the difference between the fourteen thousand cubic yards required by said contract and the 7,684 [360] cubic yards placed thereon by Erickson without expense amounting to the sum of $4,952.20. That Erickson entered upon the performance of the contract, but failed to complete the same, to the damage of the plaintiffs in the sum of $4,952.20. That in December, 1907, the plaintiffs demanded of the American Bonding Company that it pay to them the sum of $1,000, provided for in said bond, on account of the damages caused by the failure of Erickson to perform his contract, but that the bonding company refused to pay the same.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Michaud v. Erickson, 122 N.W. 324, 108 Minn. 356, 1909 Minn. LEXIS 713 (Mich. 1909).

122 N.W. 324 (Michaud v. Erickson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Healy Plumbing & Heating Co. v. Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District
169 N.W.2d 50 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1969)
HEALY PLUMB. & HEAT. CO. v. Mpls.-St. Paul San. Dist.
169 N.W.2d 50 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1969)
La Mourea v. Rhude
295 N.W. 304 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1940)
Harriet State Bank v. Samels
204 N.W. 938 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1925)
Clark v. Clark
204 N.W. 936 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1925)