Suretyship

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

• United States v. Ringwood Iron Mines, Inc.
  251 F.2d 145· 3d Cir.· 1958-01-20 ·cited 16×
  A state tax sale cannot divest a prior federal mortgage lien, as the 'first in time, first in right' rule applies.
• Smith v. Davis
  22 Fla. 405· Fla.· 1886-06-01 ·cited 16×
  Isaac Smith sought an injunction to prevent the sheriff from selling his bay mare under executions, claiming Davis had misapplied his payments and was improperly enforcing multiple judgments against him. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's denial of the injunctio
• Orloff M. Dorman v. Bigelow
  1 Fla. 281· Fla.· 1847-01-01 ·cited 16×
  In this 1847 Florida Supreme Court case, the court affirmed judgment against an endorser of a promissory note who promised to stand as security for payment. The court rejected arguments that the Statute of Frauds required the consideration to be expressed in writing on the endors
• Henderson Inv. Corp. v. Int'l Fid. Ins. Co.
  575 So. 2d 770· Fla. 5th DCA· 1991-03-07 ·cited 15×
  A surety may compel arbitration when its performance bond expressly incorporates a construction contract containing an arbitration clause.
• Merker v. Lake Region Packing Ass'n
  126 Fla. 589· Fla.· 1936-03-31 ·cited 15×
  This case concerns the application of payments from citrus fruit sales. The court held that a surety who paid a note secured by a chattel mortgage on the fruit crops was not required to apply the proceeds of those sales first to the secured note before applying them to an open ac
• The Fla. Nat'l Bank of Jacksonville v. Cnty. of Okeechobee
  117 Fla. 262· Fla.· 1934-11-15 ·cited 15×
  The Florida National Bank of Jacksonville appealed the denial of its motion to dismiss a bill of complaint filed by Okeechobee County regarding funds deposited under a tri-party agreement. The court held that even though the bank lacked authority to pledge collateral or guarantee
• 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.
• Am. Home Assurance Co. v. Vecco Concrete Constr. Co.
  629 F.2d 961· 4th Cir.· 1980-09-04 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Federal Arbitration Act applied and Mercury had not waived its right to arbitration, entitling it to a stay of proceedings.
• United States for the Use of Celanese Coatings Co. v. Gullard
  504 F.2d 466· 9th Cir.· 1974-10-17 ·cited 14×
  A Miller Act surety can appeal an adverse judgment even if its principal does not, and the one-year statute of limitations is a jurisdictional requirement that cannot be waived.
• Cole v. The Exch. Nat'l Bank OF Chicago
  183 So. 2d 195· Fla.· 1966-01-19 ·cited 14×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that mortgagors who secure the debt of another occupy a surety position, and therefore an extension of the underlying debt granted without the mortgagor's consent discharges the mortgage, overturning the Third District Court of Appeal's reliance on
• Jacobson v. Md. Cas. Co.
  336 F.2d 72· 8th Cir.· 1964-09-02 ·cited 14×
  The court held that summary judgment was improperly granted due to an inadequate record that failed to clearly demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact, particularly regarding the defendant's affirmative defense.
• Ruckman & Hansen, Inc. v. Contracting & Material Co., Inc.
  328 F.2d 744· 7th Cir.· 1964-02-26 ·cited 14×
  A surety is not discharged by overpayments made by the obligee to the principal if those payments were made in accordance with the contract and were subject to adjustment, and if the surety was not prejudiced.
• State of Fla. ex rel. The Fla. BAR v. H.E. Oxford
  127 So. 2d 107· Fla.· 1960-11-30 ·cited 14×
  The Florida Supreme Court reviewed disciplinary charges against attorney H.E. Oxford brought by The Florida Bar, involving alleged misconduct in divorce practice including false pleadings, unauthorized use of names, and perjury. The court exonerated Oxford of the serious charges
• Eve LEE and Morris Rosenberg v. Rubin
  117 So. 2d 230· Fla. 2d DCA· 1960-01-20 ·cited 14×
  Trustees of corporations sought to recover $4,985.07 under a guaranty executed by the defendants for a third-party company. The court affirmed summary judgment for the defendants, holding that the guaranty was a special guaranty addressed to specific corporations and therefore no
• Jack v. Craighead Rice Milling Co.
  167 F.2d 96· 8th Cir.· 1948-03-25 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the surety's actions constituted a waiver of the notice requirement, and the assignment of the bond did not invalidate the contract. The admission of evidence regarding waterproofing costs and the introduction of plans from a similar project were not prejudici
• Bradford v. William Marvin & Noah M. Martin
  2 Fla. 463· Fla.· 1849-01-01 ·cited 14×
  This Florida Supreme Court case addresses whether a vendor who gives an absolute deed in fee simple and takes the vendee's promissory note with a surety retains an equitable lien on the property, and whether the surety can compel sale of the land to satisfy the debt. The court ho
• United States v. Frisk
  675 F.2d 1079· 9th Cir.· 1982-04-30 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the government's cause of action as a surety accrued when it paid the lender, not when the borrower defaulted, thus the suit was timely.
• United States v. Skipper
  633 F.2d 1177· 5th Cir.· 1981-01-09 ·cited 13×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment on the forfeited bond and denial of remission, holding that the sureties were contractually bound and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying remission while the defendant remained at large.
• Fulton v. Kaiser Steel Corp. & Coppco, Inc.
  397 F.2d 580· 5th Cir.· 1968-06-28 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the plaintiffs were not entitled to interpleader because they were not exposed to double or multiple liability and could obtain full relief in a pending Colorado suit.
• Peerless Cas. Co. v. United States
  241 F.2d 811· 1st Cir.· 1957-02-27 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the Comptroller General's certification of the final settlement date under the Miller Act is conclusive and not subject to judicial review under 41 U.S.C.A. § 321, absent fraud or gross mistake.
• Riedel v. NCNB Nat'l Bank OF Fla., Inc.
  591 So. 2d 1038· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-12-26 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in dismissing the amended complaint because the exhibits attached to the complaint refuted the appellant's allegations and the claims asserted were either not recognized causes of action or were barred by the contractual terms.
• United States v. Atkinson
  748 F.2d 659· Fed. Cir.· 1984-11-16 ·cited 12×
  The Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of St. Paul's motions, holding that the filing of a Rule 60(b) motion does not toll the time for filing an appeal and that St. Paul's appeal was frivolous.
• Argonaut Ins. Co. v. Town OF Cloverdale
  699 F.2d 417· 7th Cir.· 1983-02-09 ·cited 12×
  A surety is not discharged from its obligations due to unauthorized advance payments made by the obligee in good faith reliance on an engineer's certificate, especially when the materials paid for are used in the project.
• Gatter v. Nimmo
  672 F.2d 343· 3d Cir.· 1982-03-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the VA's option to acquire defaulted loans is a matter committed to agency discretion and is not judicially reviewable under the Administrative Procedure Act.
• Vanguard Constr. Co., Inc. v. The Lewis State Bank
  348 So. 2d 72· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-07-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that individual endorsers were not discharged by an extension agreement and that the deficiency judgment was not inequitable under the circumstances.
• United States v. Jackson
  465 F.2d 964· 10th Cir.· 1972-08-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that an individual cannot be considered a surety on an appearance bond without signing it, absent clear intent to be bound.
• The AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co. v. United States
  435 F.2d 1082· 5th Cir.· 1970-12-29 ·cited 12×
  When a Miller Act surety completes a defaulted contract, the government cannot set off the contractor's unpaid taxes against the retained funds due to the surety.
• Asociacion de Azucareros de Guatemala 4a. Av. 14-53(1) Guatemala City v. United States Nat'l Bank OF Or.
  423 F.2d 638· 9th Cir.· 1970-02-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a bank issuing an irrevocable letter of credit is not released from its obligation by the beneficiary's subsequent release of the buyer, absent explicit consent to revoke the credit.
• The HERTZ Corp. v. Dixon
  193 So. 2d 176· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-12-29 ·cited 12×
  A co-owner of an automobile who executes a conditional sales contract designating himself as co-buyer and holds record title is vicariously liable for damages caused by the other co-owner's negligent operation of the vehicle.
• United Pac. Ins. Co. v. The United States & William H. Kennedy in Bankr. of Nils Sigurd Andersson
  358 F.2d 966· Ct. Cl.· 1966-04-15 ·cited 12×
  An assignment of contract proceeds, even if not fully compliant with the Assignment of Claims Act, is valid between the parties and effective against a trustee in bankruptcy, unless it constitutes a voidable preference. Advances made prior to the assignment are considered anteced
• Sterling Colo. Agency, Inc. v. Sterling Ins. Co.
  266 F.2d 472· 10th Cir.· 1959-04-25 ·cited 12×
  An insurance agent cannot recover damages for loss of renewal commissions due to the insurer's bad faith dealings with policyholders, absent a specific contract provision. The insurer's termination of the agency contract was justified by the agent's misconduct.
• Graff v. Nieberg
  233 F.2d 860· 7th Cir.· 1956-05-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the plaintiff stated a valid claim for a lien and that the district court had jurisdiction, as the defendants waived any objections to venue by their general appearance and motions to dismiss.
• Peerless Cas. Co. v. Hous. Auth. OF the City of Hazelhurst
  228 F.2d 376· 5th Cir.· 1955-12-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a bid withdrawn before acceptance, even with a bid bond, does not create liability on the bond if the principal (bidder) has no liability, especially when the bid was a mere offer without consideration.
• Indem. Ins. Co. of N. Am. v. Browning-Ferris Mach. Co.
  227 F.2d 804· 5th Cir.· 1955-12-09 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court erred in dismissing the prime contractor when the jury's verdict implicitly found against him on all issues, and that the surety's liability is not automatically discharged by the principal's erroneous dismissal.
• Tex. Water Supply Corp. v. Reconstr. Fin. Corp.
  204 F.2d 190· 5th Cir.· 1953-04-21 ·cited 12×
  The court held that no demand was necessary before suing the guarantors, and that the Texas Corporation's counterclaim was barred by the statute of limitations.
• ST. Paul Mercury Indem. Co. v. United States
  201 F.2d 57· 10th Cir.· 1952-12-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the release of one joint tortfeasor did not discharge the warehouseman's additional contract liability, and the surety was liable on the bond for the warehouseman's breach of statutory duty.
• Liebman v. United States
  153 F.2d 350· 9th Cir.· 1946-02-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the stipulation did not constitute a release or waiver of the obligation on the surety bond under the Miller Act, and the appellants' arguments were without merit.
• Allegheny Cnty. v. Md. Cas. Co.
  146 F.2d 633· 3d Cir.· 1944-12-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the prior taxpayer suit was dismissed as moot and therefore did not have res judicata effect on the current breach of contract claim.
• Bear v. Standard Accident Ins. Co.
  124 Fla. 9· Fla.· 1936-02-19 ·cited 12×
  Bear and Sullivan appealed a chancery decree denying their request for equitable relief against Standard Accident Insurance Company, a surety bond issuer. The Florida Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding that Sullivan and Bear are entitled to have a court of equity adjudi
• Peacock v. Farmers & Merchs. Bank
  454 So. 2d 730· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-08-17 ·cited 11×
  Homeowners who personally guaranteed loans to their company appealed a foreclosure judgment on their residence and other personal property. The court affirmed the foreclosure, rejecting their claims that the bank impaired collateral, materially altered notes, and violated their r
• Argonaut Ins. Co. v. Commercial Standard Ins. Co.
  380 So. 2d 1066· Fla. 2d DCA· 1980-02-06 ·cited 11×
  A completing surety, by stepping into the shoes of the principal contractor, becomes a successor to the obligee and has standing to sue on the subcontractor's performance bond, notwithstanding a limiting clause.
• Columbia Broad. Sys., Inc. v. Stokely-Van Camp, Inc.
  522 F.2d 369· 2d Cir.· 1975-06-19 ·cited 11×
  The court held that there were disputed issues of fact regarding whether the advertising agency had actual or apparent authority to bind the sponsor, and that equitable estoppel might apply due to the network's knowledge of the agency's financial difficulties and failure to infor
• Milwaukee Constr. Co. (Inc.) v. Glens Falls Ins. Co.
  367 F.2d 964· 9th Cir.· 1966-10-24 ·cited 11×
  A surety can seek equitable relief, specifically specific performance of an indemnity agreement, to compel a principal to deposit funds as collateral when the principal has defaulted and the surety faces potential liability, even if the exact amount of loss is not yet precisely d
• Reel v. Livingston
  34 Fla. 377· Fla.· 1894-06-01 ·cited 11×
  E. J. Reel, a surety on promissory notes executed by J. H. Livingston, paid a judgment obtained against Livingston and sought to recover from property that Livingston had transferred to his wife. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the lower court's dismissal, holding that a suret
• City OF Treasure Island v. Provident Mgmt. Corp. & Laurence N. Belair
  678 So. 2d 1322· Fla. 2d DCA· 1996-06-28 ·cited 10×
  The City of Treasure Island appealed judgments awarding damages to Provident Management Corporation and Laurence Belair for a zoning injunction that was later reversed. The court held that a municipality does not automatically become its own surety when a trial court dispenses wi
• Dealers Ins. Co., Inc. v. Centennial Cas. Co.
  644 So. 2d 571· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-10-14 ·cited 10×
  Dealers Insurance Company appeals a judgment awarding recovery under a motor vehicle dealer bond. The court affirms that Centennial Casualty Company, as subrogee of an auction house, is a statutorily authorized claimant under the bond, but reverses the award of attorney's fees ag
• In re Bohlen Enters., Ltd. v. The Nat'l Bank OF Waterloo
  859 F.2d 561· 8th Cir.· 1988-09-30 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the earmarked funds doctrine applies, preventing the transfer from being a voidable preference because the funds were not the debtor's property and did not diminish the debtor's estate.
• United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. W. Point Constr. Co., Inc.
  837 F.2d 1507· 11th Cir.· 1988-02-22 ·cited 10×
  A surety issuing a performance bond that incorporates the underlying subcontract by reference is bound by the subcontract's arbitration clause.
• Balboa Ins. Co. v. The United States
  775 F.2d 1158· Fed. Cir.· 1985-10-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that both the Claims Court and the appellate court have jurisdiction over a Miller Act surety's claim for improperly disbursed funds, and that summary judgment was improper because material facts regarding the government's exercise of discretion were in dispute.
• United States v. Warwick
  695 F.2d 1063· 7th Cir.· 1982-12-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the appellants were principals on the note, not sureties, and that even if they were sureties, they waived their right to release due to loan modifications. The court also held that the sale of collateral was commercially reasonable.