Royal Indemnity Co. v. Independence Indemnity Co.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Dietrich, J.
Upon sustaining a demurrer to plaintiff’s complaint, the court below entered a judgment of dismissal, from which the plaintiff appeals.
From the complaint and exhibits attached thereto it appears that in districts designated as Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, the city of Reeds-port, Or., projected certain street improve *44 ments, involving, among other things, the making of fills. At the same time the port of Umpqua was desirous of having deepened a section of the Umpqua river channel, and' as suitable equipment for such work it was the owner of a suction dredge, derrick, scow, and accessories. By carrying on the two improvements at the same time, the material removed in deepening the river channel could be economically utilized in making the fills. Accordingly the Inland Construction Company secured contracts from the city of Reedsport for the street improvements in the several districts, and also entered into a contract with the port of Umpqua, under the terms of which it obtained the use of the dredge and other equipment, in consideration of ,its doing certain specified work in deepening the river channel, and also making payment of a stipulated rental.