-
74 Fla. 446·
Fla.·
1917-12-08
·cited 107×
In this surety bond case, the Florida Supreme Court upheld a judgment against National Surety Company for losses resulting from the fraud and dishonesty of bank cashier Alonzo Wilder. The court affirmed that the bond should be construed liberally in favor of the insured bank, rej
-
105 So. 2d 190·
Fla. 2d DCA·
1958-09-10
·cited 34×
A material supplier brought suit against members of a county school board and their sureties for failure to require a properly conditioned contractor's bond as required by Florida statute. The court affirmed the trial court's dismissal, holding that the bond, read in connection w
-
79 Fla. 266·
Fla.·
1920-03-19
·cited 26×
Milton, as surety on a bond guaranteeing Clark's performance as an insurance agent for Burton, appealed a judgment finding him liable for Clark's debts. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, holding that parol evidence of an oral agreement regarding Clark's acceptance of notes was
-
542 F.2d 262·
5th Cir.·
1976-11-12
·cited 22×
The court held that the district court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1352, that the payment bond covered equipment rentals and repairs, and that the Miller Act statute of limitations and notice requirements did not apply. However, the award of attorneys' fees was improper.
-
182 F.2d 752·
8th Cir.·
1950-06-27
·cited 18×
A compensated surety's contract is construed against the surety, and if the bond is fairly open to two interpretations, the one favoring the insured will be adopted. Assignees of the original obligee are covered by the bond when the contract referenced in the bond contemplates su
-
723 F.2d 1206·
5th Cir.·
1984-02-02
·cited 14×
Summary judgment for most defendants is affirmed, but reversed and remanded for the Director of Corrections and the sanitarians due to disputed material facts regarding their duties and potential breaches.
-
340 F.2d 542·
8th Cir.·
1965-01-26
·cited 12×
A surety is liable to third persons only when the bond contains a specific promise for the claimant's benefit; general contractual duties do not extend surety liability to third-party tort claimants.
-
188 F.2d 654·
D.C. Cir.·
1951-03-15
·cited 12×
The dissenting judge argues that a renewal bond should be treated as a separate contract for each period, allowing recovery for losses in each period up to the bond's maximum, contrary to the majority's interpretation.
-
217 F.2d 275·
4th Cir.·
1954-12-01
·cited 11×
Sureties on a payment bond are not liable for federal income and FICA taxes withheld by the principal from employee wages but not paid to the government.
-
825 F.2d 1204·
7th Cir.·
1987-08-05
·cited 10×
A surety bond's unambiguous 'no right of action' clause, limiting enforcement to the named obligee, is enforceable and prevents a disclosed principal from suing on the bond.
-
453 F.2d 1048·
5th Cir.·
1972-01-13
·cited 10×
A surety bond issued for private construction that purports to protect against mechanics' liens must be construed and applied in accordance with Florida Statute § 713.23, even if it contains non-complying provisions.
-
296 F.2d 393·
D.C. Cir.·
1961-08-03
·cited 10×
-
681 F.2d 930·
4th Cir.·
1982-06-17
·cited 8×
The dissenting judge believes the trial judge erred by failing to strike deposition testimony not based on personal knowledge, which was prejudicial to the defendant.
-
222 F.2d 16·
8th Cir.·
1955-05-02
·cited 8×
The court held that the surety bond protected the subcontractor, and the surety could not limit its liability by contract or raise defenses not timely asserted. The statutory penalty and attorney fees were properly awarded.
-
577 F.2d 919·
5th Cir.·
1978-08-01
·cited 7×
A trial court cannot extend an ordinary surety bond to guarantee a defendant's presence for sentencing after an appeal has been denied without the express consent of the surety.
-
268 F.2d 610·
5th Cir.·
1959-06-29
·cited 7×
The court held that a surety bond under the Miller Act covers a contractor's obligation to reimburse a lessor for lost rented equipment, in addition to rental payments.
-
219 F.2d 645·
2d Cir.·
1955-02-07
·cited 6×
A surety bond conditioned on the principal's payment of material obligations creates a direct right for materialmen against the surety, regardless of the obligee's primary motive for requiring the bond.
-
117 F.2d 503·
2d Cir.·
1941-02-10
·cited 6×
The court held that the surety bond's broad language indemnified the United States against claims arising from the issuance of a duplicate service certificate, even if the claims were not valid or resulted from the United States' own negligence.
-
385 So. 2d 1163·
Fla. 2d DCA·
1980-07-11
·cited 4×
The court reversed dismissal of a complaint by union pension fund trustees against a performance bond surety, holding that trustees of collectively bargained fringe benefit funds may recover unpaid contributions from a Section 255.05 public works bond, as such contributions const
-
377 So. 2d 993·
Fla. 2d DCA·
1979-11-21
·cited 4×
Langston, injured as a passenger in a vehicle operated by Fred Johnson and owned by George Johnson, Jr., appeals a summary judgment dismissing his claims against the vehicle owner and the surety bond company. The court reverses, holding that under Florida tort law, the owner can
-
226 So. 2d 28·
Fla. 4th DCA·
1969-07-22
·cited 4×
In this second appeal, the court addressed the liability of a gratuitous indemnitor of a surety bond. The court held that the indemnitor's status and responsibility are governed by the indemnitee agreement (an Application for Contract or Bid Bond), not the bond itself, and affirm
-
795 F.2d 372·
4th Cir.·
1986-07-10
·cited 2×
The Claimants are third-party beneficiaries of the indemnity bond and are entitled to sue for their unpaid claims.
-
711 F.2d 131·
9th Cir.·
1983-07-19
·cited 2×
Summary judgment for the supplier was inappropriate because the district court failed to consider extrinsic evidence that could make the bond language susceptible to the surety's interpretation regarding coverage.
-
138 F.2d 469·
7th Cir.·
1943-10-25
·cited 2×
The surety bond is liable because the Industrial Commission had the authority to accept the plaintiff's deposit as security, and the examiner acted within his official capacity.
-
123 F.2d 746·
9th Cir.·
1941-11-17
·cited 2×
The surety is liable under the bond for damages arising from the contractor's negligence, irrespective of the insurance policy's exclusions.
-
68 Fla. 476·
Fla.·
1914-12-09
·cited 2×
The court affirmed a directed verdict against a surety company on a $75,000 bond. The bond secured city funds deposited in a bank, and the court held that the surety was liable for all funds collected by the bank on behalf of the city, including license taxes.
-
521 F. Supp. 2d 1326·
M.D. Fla.·
2007-10-08
The court held that XL failed to comply with the bond's notice and response requirements, and this failure operates as a waiver of its right to dispute the claim.
-
806 F.2d 1·
1st Cir.·
1986-11-24
The court held that the surety bond in an interpleader action must be interpreted contextually to cover judgments against the insureds, not just the insurer, to satisfy the purpose of the interpleader statute.
-
36 Fla. Supp. 188·
Brevard Cty. Cir. Ct.·
1971-11-18
The court held that the surety bond was sufficiently broad to cover the salesman's actions, even if outside the scope of his employment with the principal, because the statute's purpose is public protection.