Globe Navigation Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co.

Citations

• 39 Wash. 299
• 81 P. 826
• 1905 Wash. LEXIS 861

Syllabus

<p>Indemnity—Cost of Defending Suit—Liability Upon One of Several Causes. Where an indemnity company was required by its bond to defend actions for negligence at its own expense, and made defense to an action for negligence, in which was joined, also, a right of action upon a maritime contract for medical attendance, it is liable for all the costs and expense incurred, where the record fails to show what amount was expended to establish the defense to the cause of action upon the maritime contract.</p> <p>Estoppel—Indemnity—Bonds—Indemnity Against Personal Injuries Prom Negligence—Recovery on Maritime Contract—Surety’s Defense of Suit—Dismissal of Appeal With Promise to Pay Judgment. An indemnity company which, in defending an action for a loss, requests the dismissal of the appeal and promises to pay the judgment, is estopped to assert that it did not know the true nature of the claim and is not liable for the amount of the judgment, where it appears that, pursuant to its bond, it undertook the defense through attorneys selected by it, upon representations of the defendant, made in good faith, that the action was to recover for negligence in the operation of a ship, covered by the bond, although a right of action upon a maritime contract not covered by the bond was included, upon which judgment was entered, the claim for negligence being defeated.</p> <p>Estoppel—Intent. A design to mislead is not necessary to create an estoppel, where the conduct is such as to induce a reasonable man to act upon it, and the defendant was warranted in assuming that the unconditional order to dismiss the appeal was advisedly made. . .</p> <p>Same—Equity. , It cannot be urged to defeat the estoppel that the parties stood upon an equal footing, since the duty of making the defense devolved upon the indemnity company.</p> <p>Same—Knowledge of Facts—Negligence. In such a case, the estoppel is not defeated by reason of the fact that the company did not have full knowledge of the facts re