Prejudice To Surety

17 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Wiley v. State
  451 So. 2d 916· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-06-01 ·cited 28×
  A surety insurance company appealed a forfeiture judgment on a criminal bail bond, arguing that the trial court's vacation of the initial forfeiture order should have automatically cancelled the bond under Florida Statute 903.31. The court held that vacation of a forfeiture for f
• Nat'l Gypsum Co. v. Travelers Indem. Co.
  417 So. 2d 254· Fla.· 1982-07-08 ·cited 23×
  The Florida Supreme Court reviewed a case where a materialman sued a surety for payment after the contractor defaulted. The court held that strict compliance with the bond's notice provision was required, rejecting the argument that the surety must show prejudice from the lack of
• William Robert Ryan (Al Estes Bonding Company) v. State
  380 So. 2d 539· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-02-27 ·cited 20×
  Ryan appeals a trial court's denial of his motion to set aside a bond forfeiture. The court held that the 1977 amendment to Florida Statute § 903.26(2) does not require post-forfeiture written notice to the surety as a condition of enforcing forfeiture, distinguishing this requir
• The Winston Corp. v. Cont'l Cas. Co.
  508 F.2d 1298· 6th Cir.· 1975-01-17 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the April 7 agreement was not a novation that discharged the surety, and the failure to provide seven days' notice was an insubstantial breach that did not prejudice the surety.
• United States on Behalf & for the Benefit of Army Athletic Ass'n & Naval Acad. Athletic Ass'n v. Reliance Ins. Co.
  799 F.2d 1382· 9th Cir.· 1986-09-16 ·cited 14×
  Material modifications to a bonded contract, made without the surety's knowledge or consent, can exonerate the surety from liability, especially when those modifications are prejudicial.
• United Bonding Ins. Co. v. Se. Reg'l Builders, Inc.
  236 So. 2d 460· Fla. 1st DCA· 1970-06-16 ·cited 12×
  United Bonding Insurance Company issued a performance bond naming Newman and Kenny, a partnership, as principal, but the principals altered the bond to designate themselves as a corporation without the surety's knowledge. When the subcontractor defaulted, the surety denied liabil
• William v. Gruman
  148 So. 2d 759· Fla. 2d DCA· 1963-01-04 ·cited 11×
  In this surety bond case, the court reversed the dismissal of Maryland Casualty Company from a construction contract dispute. The court held that a compensated surety is not automatically discharged when contract modifications are made without its knowledge unless the surety prov
• Fast Release Bail Bonds, Inc. v. State
  895 So. 2d 448· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-02-02 ·cited 8×
  Two bail bond sureties appeal the denial of their motion to set aside a bond forfeiture, arguing they were prejudiced by the court's issuance of a capias that caused the defendant to flee. The court affirmed, holding that the defendant's independent decision to flee, rather than
• Golden W. Constr. Co. v. United States for the Use & Benefit of George Bernadot
  304 F.2d 753· 10th Cir.· 1962-05-31 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Miller Act claim was timely filed, a letter detailing an oral agreement was admissible, the surety was not prejudiced by contract modifications, and interest against the surety should only be awarded from the date of suit commencement.
• Ramada Dev. Co. v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co.
  626 F.2d 517· 6th Cir.· 1980-06-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a surety is not discharged pro tanto for advance payments made by the obligee to the principal if those payments do not materially prejudice the surety's interests. The court also held that interest on the judgment should be calculated from the date of payment
• Reliance Ins. Co. of Philadelphia v. Colbert
  365 F.2d 530· D.C. Cir.· 1966-07-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that material alterations to a construction contract without the surety's consent can discharge the surety's obligation, but the surety is only released to the extent of demonstrable prejudice caused by the alterations.
• Dependable Ins. Co., Inc. v. Union Cnty.
  509 So. 2d 1228· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-07-07 ·cited 4×
  A surety is not automatically relieved of a forfeited bail bond due to the clerk's failure to provide prompt notice of forfeiture if the surety cannot prove prejudice resulting from the delay.
• Nat'l Union Indem. Co. v. G. E. Bass & Co., Inc.
  369 F.2d 75· 5th Cir.· 1966-11-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that premature payments by a prime contractor to a subcontractor, which substantially altered the contract and prejudiced the surety, entitled the surety to a pro tanto release from its obligations.
• Basic Asphalt & Constr. Corp. v. Parliament Ins. Co.
  531 F.2d 702· 5th Cir.· 1976-05-12 ·cited 3×
  A compensated surety is not automatically discharged by an extension of time granted to the debtor without the surety's consent, but only to the extent of prejudice shown.
• United States v. Duby
  201 F.2d 800· 9th Cir.· 1952-01-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the surety is not automatically released by the government's failure to deduct accrued liquidated damages from progress payments; prejudice to the surety must be proven.
• Hartford Cas. Ins. Co. v. City of Marathon
  825 F. Supp. 2d 1276· S.D. Fla.· 2011-11-18 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the Area 7 Change Order constituted a cardinal change to the original contract, relieving Hartford of its obligations under the performance bond for that change order.
• Crane Supply Co. v. Am. States Ins. Co.
  310 F.2d 712· 6th Cir.· 1962-11-15 ·cited 1×
  A compensated surety is not discharged from its bond obligation due to accepting a contractor's promissory notes as evidence of indebtedness, absent proof of prejudice or an actual extension of time for payment.