Surety Liability

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

• Phoenix Assurance Co. OF NEW York v. Appleton City
  296 F.2d 787· 8th Cir.· 1961-12-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a contract provision making an engineer's decision conclusive on performance is qualified by subsequent provisions requiring acceptance by the governing body, and that a surety is not liable for vexatious delay penalties when a good faith dispute exists regard
• Wald v. Eagle Indem. Co.
  178 F.2d 91· 5th Cir.· 1949-12-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court's finding that the owner incurred no loss in completing the building was clearly erroneous, requiring a new trial on the issue of damages.
• Davis v. Woolf
  147 F.2d 629· 4th Cir.· 1945-02-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the validity of a deed of trust given by an allegedly insolvent corporation to a director for indemnity cannot be determined on the current record and must be remanded for further factual findings.
• Union Indem. Co. v. State
  99 Fla. 656· Fla.· 1930-03-26 ·cited 8×
  Union Indemnity Company, as surety on a contractor's bond, appeals a judgment requiring it to pay for groceries supplied to feed the contractor's laborers on a state road construction project. The Florida Supreme Court affirms, holding that groceries furnished to feed laborers in
• State v. Montague
  34 Fla. 32· Fla.· 1894-06-01 ·cited 8×
  This case concerns whether a tax collector's official bond covers liability for unpaid advertising fees for tax sales. The court held that the bond, which specifically covers the faithful collection and payment of taxes, does not extend to these advertising fees, as they are cons
• United States v. Nat'l Sur. Corp.
  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.
• Spessard L. Holland v. Mass. Bonding & Ins. Co.
  156 Fla. 583· Fla.· 1945-11-27 ·cited 7×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's decision to sustain a demurrer, holding that a plaintiff suing on an administrator's bond must allege specific damages to recover, not just the bond's penal sum.
• Archibald v. Donald
  98 Fla. 698· Fla.· 1929-10-18 ·cited 7×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court decision that had vacated a judgment against sureties on a forthcoming bond, holding that sureties who execute and file such bonds voluntarily submit to the court's jurisdiction and statutory procedures for enforcement, and therefo
• AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Hubbel
  704 So. 2d 1141· Fla. 5th DCA· 1998-01-30 ·cited 6×
  A surety bond does not create liability for attorney's fees unless the bond itself contains such a provision, and the attorney fee provision of the Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act is not incorporated into Chapter 320 by reference.
• The Arbor Club OF Boca Raton, Inc., Ltd. v. Omega Constr. Co., Inc.
  565 So. 2d 357· Fla. 4th DCA· 1990-07-18 ·cited 6×
  Arbor Club sued surety Transamerica for delay damages resulting from contractor Omega's breach of a construction contract. The trial court instructed the jury that the surety was not liable for delay damages, and the jury returned a verdict for Transamerica. The appellate court r
• United States v. The Am. Ins. Co.
  835 F.2d 745· 10th Cir.· 1987-12-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the subcontractor's notice was sufficient under the Miller Act, and that the contract could be altered by an executed oral agreement under Oklahoma law. However, attorney's fees were improperly awarded.
• Bankers Ins. Co. v. State
  437 So. 2d 708· Fla. 2d DCA· 1983-07-06 ·cited 6×
  Bankers Insurance Company, as surety on bail bonds for seven defendants charged with RICO and marijuana trafficking offenses, appeals the trial court's denial of its motion to set aside a judgment of bond estreature. The court affirmed, holding that amendments to the criminal cha
• Indus. Builders, Inc. v. Heritage Ins. Co. OF Am.
  416 So. 2d 1244· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-07-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while it was error to base judgment on photographs not admitted into evidence, this error was harmless due to ample other testimony. The court also affirmed the finding of contract breach and the decision to allow evidence on damages at a later hearing.
• United States v. Vera-Estrada
  577 F.2d 598· 9th Cir.· 1978-06-28 ·cited 6×
  A surety is not entitled to notice of its principal's failure to appear under Fed.R.Crim.P. 46(e)(1).
• Silvers v. TTC Indus., Inc.
  484 F.2d 194· 6th Cir.· 1973-09-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiffs were not entitled to rescission of the reorganization plan due to their knowledge of the misrepresented facts and lack of diligence, but remanded for further determination of damages related to the wrongful injunction.
• C. Wallace Indus., Inc. v. State of Fla. for the use & benefit of Suncoast Equip. Rental Serv., Inc.
  269 So. 2d 392· Fla. 2d DCA· 1972-11-01 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the trial court's judgment in a materialman's lien action against a contractor and surety under a public works construction contract, finding no reversible error.
• United Bonding Ins. Co. v. M. D. Moody & Sons, Inc.
  213 So. 2d 263· Fla. 1st DCA· 1968-08-15 ·cited 6×
  United Bonding Insurance Company appealed a summary judgment requiring it to pay M. D. Moody & Sons for equipment rental and repairs under a performance bond issued for a road construction subcontract. The court held that equipment rental constitutes "labor and materials" covered
• United States for the Use of Gen. Elec. Co. v. H. I. Lewis Constr. Co., Inc.
  375 F.2d 194· 2d Cir.· 1967-03-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the ninety-day notice requirement under the Miller Act is a strict condition precedent, and a late delivery of replacement materials, not part of the original contract, cannot revive a claim extinguished by the expired notice period.
• 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.
• Seaboard Sur. Co. v. United States for Use & Benefit of C.D.G., Inc.
  355 F.2d 139· 9th Cir.· 1966-01-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a subcontractor wrongfully terminated can elect to sue for the reasonable value of work performed, and that pre-judgment interest is only proper on damages that are certain or capable of being made certain by calculation.
• The Summit Fid. & Sur. Co. v. State
  166 So. 2d 757· Fla. 1st DCA· 1964-08-11 ·cited 6×
  Summit Fidelity & Surety Co. appealed a judgment forfeiting a bail bond when the principal failed to appear in court. The court affirmed the judgment, rejecting the surety's argument that the clerk's alleged negligence in docketing and filing duties excused the bond obligation.
• Matanuska Valley Lines, Inc. v. Neal
  255 F.2d 632· 9th Cir.· 1957-12-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying motions to discharge supersedeas bonds and exonerate sureties, as the appeals had been dismissed and the bond conditions were met. The court also affirmed the judgment, subject to a potential remittitur for one plaintiff'
• Pierce Contractors, Inc. v. Peerless Cas. Co.
  81 So. 2d 747· Fla.· 1955-07-27 ·cited 6×
  Pierce Contractors, a subcontractor, sued in Florida state court to recover amounts due under a surety bond issued by Peerless Casualty Company for a federal construction project at Charleston Air Base. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, holdin
• United States v. Mann
  197 F.2d 39· 10th Cir.· 1952-05-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the contract provision for payment from estimates was intended to establish the time and method of payment, not to limit payment solely to that fund, thus preserving personal liability.
• Ætna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. B. B. B. Const. Corp.
  173 F.2d 307· 2d Cir.· 1949-03-15 ·cited 6×
  A surety on a payment bond is not liable for interest after principal claims are paid if it properly utilized the interpleader action by posting a bond, thus avoiding default.
• Spruks v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co.
  138 F.2d 812· 3d Cir.· 1943-11-17 ·cited 6×
  A surety on a supersedeas bond is not liable for interest on a fund that remained in the court registry during an appeal, where the original decree did not award interest and the appellate court affirmed without awarding interest.
• Kidd v. City of Jacksonville
  106 Fla. 312· Fla.· 1932-08-02 ·cited 6×
  In this third appeal, the Florida Supreme Court addressed whether a surety company on a contractor's bond is liable to a materialman for lumber supplied but diverted by the contractor to non-contract uses. The Court held the surety is liable only for materials actually used in th
• Int'l Fid. Ins. Co. v. Prestige Rent-A-Car, Inc.
  715 So. 2d 1025· Fla. 5th DCA· 1998-07-24 ·cited 5×
  International Fidelity Insurance Company, as surety on a replevin bond, appeals orders requiring it to pay on the bond and reimburse attorneys' fees after leased automobiles were replevied and later sold. The court affirmed, holding that the surety's liability is established by t
• Biltmore Constr. Co., Inc. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh
  572 So. 2d 532· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-11-21 ·cited 5×
  Biltmore Construction sued Demarest Company and its surety National Union on a performance bond for breach of a subcontract. The trial court granted summary judgment for National Union, finding Biltmore had sued the wrong Demarest entity and failed to plead the principal's defaul
• Worthley v. State
  320 So. 2d 479· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-10-21 ·cited 5×
  A surety company's appeal of a bond forfeiture judgment is affirmed because the surety was not released upon the defendant's acceptance into a Pre-Trial Intervention Program and the motion to vacate was untimely filed.
• Farmers Elevator Mut. Ins. Co. v. Jewett
  394 F.2d 896· 10th Cir.· 1968-05-17 ·cited 5×
  The court held that scale ticket holders are entitled to recovery on the warehouseman's bond, as the warehouseman's failure to issue proper receipts constituted a violation of his obligations under the United States Warehouse Act.
• A-Alternative Release Bail Bonds & Ranger Ins. Co. v. Martin Cnty.
  882 So. 2d 414· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-08-11 ·cited 4×
  A dissenting opinion argues that a surety remains obligated on a bail bond even when the formal charges filed after the bond posting are more serious than the initial arrest charge, as long as the bond generally describes the offense.
• The Sw. Fla. Ret. Ctr., Inc. v. Fed. Ins. Co.
  682 So. 2d 1130· Fla. 2d DCA· 1996-10-09 ·cited 4×
  A retirement center owner sued a surety on a payment and performance bond for latent defects discovered 10 years after construction completion. The court reversed the trial court's dismissal based on the five-year statute of limitations, holding that when a construction contract
• The United States v. The Cocoa Berkau
  990 F.2d 610· Fed. Cir.· 1993-03-30 ·cited 4×
  The Court of Appeals held that the government's action to recover liquidated damages for breach of an entry bond was time-barred because the statute of limitations began to run upon the principal's failure to redeliver the merchandise, not upon the surety's subsequent failure to
• United States for the Use & Benefit of T.M.S. Mech. Contractors, Inc. v. Millers Mut. Fire Ins. Co. OF Tex.
  942 F.2d 946· 5th Cir.· 1991-09-25 ·cited 4×
  A subcontractor can recover increased out-of-pocket costs for labor and materials furnished due to contractor or government delay under the Miller Act, but cannot recover for profits on those costs or for costs incurred after contract termination.
• United States v. Am. Mfrs. Mut. Cas. Co.
  901 F.2d 370· 4th Cir.· 1990-03-09 ·cited 4×
  A surety under the Miller Act is liable for prejudgment interest and penalties on unpaid withheld taxes if the government provides timely written notice of the contractor's default, even if the notice contains minor inaccuracies.
• United States v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co.
  832 F.2d 1150· 9th Cir.· 1987-11-18 ·cited 4×
  A Miller Act surety is bound by a prior state court judgment against its principal if the surety had notice and an opportunity to defend, as its liability is derivative and its interests are identical to the principal's.
• Alpha Elec. Supply, Inc. v. G.E. LEE Enters., Inc.
  441 So. 2d 698· Fla. 2d DCA· 1983-11-30 ·cited 4×
  Alpha Electric Supply sued G.E. Lee Enterprises and its stockholder guarantors for open-account indebtedness. The trial court granted defendants' motion for new trial based on an alleged inconsistency in the jury's special verdict, and denied prejudgment interest and costs on the
• Trudeau v. Wyrick
  713 F.2d 1360· 8th Cir.· 1983-08-05 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge would reverse and remand, finding the jury's verdict unsupported by the instructions given and the theories submitted.
• United States v. Ryan
  580 F.2d 151· 5th Cir.· 1978-09-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal because no final judgment had been entered against the surety company, and the order was not an appealable interlocutory order.
• Am. Emp'rs' Ins. Co. v. Piedmont Sewing Supply, Inc.
  287 So. 2d 111· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-12-11 ·cited 4×
  American Employers' Insurance Company, as surety on a forthcoming bond in a replevin action, appealed the denial of its motion for relief from a default judgment. The court reversed, holding that a conditional vendor's judgment in a replevin action must be limited to its special
• United States v. Eskew
  469 F.2d 278· 9th Cir.· 1972-11-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the clerk's belief in the bondsman's authority was reasonable, and the surety is liable for the full forfeited amount.
• Luksus v. United Pac. Ins. Co.
  452 F.2d 207· 7th Cir.· 1971-11-29 ·cited 4×
  A surety is liable for the principal contractor's indebtedness, including pre-judgment interest, and the creditor may apply payments to outstanding debts when the debtor does not direct otherwise.
• United Bonding Ins. Co. v. Minichiello
  221 So. 2d 220· Fla. 1st DCA· 1969-03-20 ·cited 4×
  The court addresses whether wall-to-wall carpeting installed as permanent flooring in new construction constitutes real or personal property, holding that it is a fixture and part of the real property, thereby entitling the carpeting subcontractor to assert a lien against the sur
• United Bonding Ins. Co. v. Atl. Roofing & Sheet Metal Co., Inc.
  221 So. 2d 461· Fla. 1st DCA· 1969-02-06 ·cited 4×
  A performance surety remains liable on its bond notwithstanding minor changes in contract specifications made without the surety's knowledge and consent, and subcontractors are not estopped from suing on the bond due to the owner's failure to provide timely notice of the contract
• Franchi Constr. Co., Inc. v. United States ex rel. Consol. Comstock Co., Inc.
  392 F.2d 717· 5th Cir.· 1968-03-07 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that the subcontractor was not obligated to install the disputed rod supports and ceiling support angles, and that attorneys' fees were properly awarded against the surety.
• AETNA Ins. Co. v. Junction Warehouse Co.
  389 F.2d 464· 5th Cir.· 1968-02-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the issuance of a scale ticket and promise of a warehouse receipt, even for non-existent grain, formalized the transaction sufficiently to bring it within the scope of a public warehouseman's statutory duties and thus the surety's bond.
• J. F. White Eng'g Corp. v. Gen. Ins. Co. OF Am.
  351 F.2d 231· 10th Cir.· 1965-09-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court properly submitted issues of mitigation, fraud, and reliance to the jury, and that there was insufficient evidence to hold Orcelia White liable for negligence.
• NEW Amsterdam Cas. Co. v. Mitchell
  325 F.2d 474· 5th Cir.· 1963-12-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that loss of rentals was not a recoverable damage because the houses were built for sale, not rent, and such damages were not contemplated by the parties. The court affirmed awards for purchased claims and discount costs, and remanded for entry of judgment includin
• Lizza & Sons, Inc. v. D'Onfro
  282 F.2d 175· 1st Cir.· 1960-08-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that no contract was formed between the parties, and therefore the surety was not liable on its performance bond.