Suretyship

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

• Henry C. Beck Co. v. Fort Wayne Structural Steel Co.
  701 F.2d 1221· 7th Cir.· 1983-03-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that neither the statute of frauds nor the exclusive remedy provision of the Indiana Workmen's Compensation Act barred an action for indemnification based on an express oral contract.
• In re E. Freight Ways, Inc. v. Seaboard Sur. Co.
  577 F.2d 175· 2d Cir.· 1978-05-25 ·cited 6×
  A surety is not entitled to setoffs against bankrupt's debtors until it exhausts its recourse from a letter of credit collateralizing its obligations, and the bankruptcy court has jurisdiction to determine the allocation of those proceeds.
• Kurek v. Pleasure Driveway & Park Dist. OF Peoria
  574 F.2d 892· 7th Cir.· 1978-03-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Clayton Act, as interpreted by Vendo, does not authorize federal injunctions against state court judgments unless the state proceedings constitute a pattern of baseless, repetitive claims.
• United States For the Use of Ins. Co. OF N. Am. v. Santa FE Eng'rs, Inc.
  567 F.2d 860· 9th Cir.· 1978-01-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the appeal was frivolous and affirmed the lower court's judgment, assessing double costs against the appellant.
• Peoples Bank of the Virgin Islands v. Figueroa
  559 F.2d 914· 3d Cir.· 1977-07-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that accommodation endorsers of a note cannot escape liability based on the bank's alleged failure to disclose the maker's financial condition or a director's alleged misconduct, especially when the endorsers made no independent inquiries and were procured by the m
• Am. Fid. Fire Ins. Co. v. The United States v. Ernst H. Brandt, III
  513 F.2d 1375· Ct. Cl.· 1975-04-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the surety could recover the amount paid by the government to the contractor after notice, but not the retainage, and that the government could recover the amount paid from the contractor.
• Guida v. The Exch. Nat'l Bank OF Tampa
  308 So. 2d 148· Fla. 2d DCA· 1975-02-05 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision invalidating the patent for obviousness.
• Siata Int'l U. S. A., Inc. v. Ins. Co. OF N. Am.
  498 F.2d 817· 3d Cir.· 1974-06-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the bond was ambiguous and required extrinsic evidence to determine its meaning, reversing the trial court's directed verdict.
• ST. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. & Boston Ins. Co. v. Commodity Credit Corp.
  474 F.2d 192· 5th Cir.· 1973-02-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that UFMA's failure to redeem cotton collateral within 15 days of selling its interest constituted a breach of the 1963 Cotton Cooperative Loan Agreement, making the sureties liable on their performance bonds.
• ST. Petersburg Bank & Tr. Co. v. Boutin
  445 F.2d 1028· 5th Cir.· 1971-06-24 ·cited 6×
  The SBA was discharged from its first loan guaranty due to the Bank's material increase of risk by pledging set-aside securities for non-guaranteed loans. However, the SBA remained liable on the second guaranty because its own examination should have revealed the securities' abse
• Cliff Byler v. Great Am. Ins. Co.
  395 F.2d 273· 10th Cir.· 1968-06-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the subcontract payment provision was not a condition precedent to the contractor's obligation to pay the subcontractor, and the performance bond was intended to benefit subcontractors.
• 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.
• Am. Mortg. & Safe Deposit Co. v. Seymour Rubin
  168 So. 2d 777· Fla. 3d DCA· 1964-11-03 ·cited 6×
  This case involves a dispute over liability for defaults on a commercial lease and mortgage following the dissolution of Joel Mark Corporation and subsequent assignment of its leasehold interests. The court held that individual stockholders/trustees could be held liable for corpo
• The Exch. Nat'l Bank OF Chicago v. Cole
  161 So. 2d 715· Fla. 3d DCA· 1964-03-17 ·cited 6×
  Exchange National Bank appealed a dismissal of its mortgage foreclosure action against the Coles. The court reversed, holding that mortgagors' primary obligation to pay a debt is not extinguished when the creditor takes a renewal note for a lesser amount with an extended payment
• Edwards v. Mrs. Dorothy Dannenberg Greenwald
  217 F.2d 632· 5th Cir.· 1954-12-15 ·cited 6×
  Trust income used to pay notes incurred contemporaneously with trust creation is not taxable to the settlors if the settlors receive no personal benefit.
• Howard Johnson, Inc. v. Tucker
  157 F.2d 959· 5th Cir.· 1946-11-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the claims for goods sold and rent accrued before bankruptcy exceeded the trustee's claim, and that damages for lease rejection should be determined and considered as recoupment, not a separate setoff.
• Standard Sur. & Cas. Co. of N.Y. v. Olson
  150 F.2d 385· 8th Cir.· 1945-07-12 ·cited 6×
  Fraudulent inducement by a third party in procuring an indemnity agreement is not a defense against the obligee if the obligee had no notice of or participation in the fraud.
• Codell v. Am. Sur. Co.
  149 F.2d 854· 6th Cir.· 1945-06-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the sureties were entitled to compensation based on one percent of the contract price, not the bond's penalty amount, as the contractors were not misled to their detriment by the sureties' silence.
• Prichard v. Nelson
  137 F.2d 312· 4th Cir.· 1943-07-23 ·cited 6×
  A creditor cannot collect from a surety a sum in excess of that which has been judicially determined to be owed by the principal debtor, especially when the judgment against the principal has been paid and accepted.
• Harby Moses v. John T. Gilchrist and Son
  14 Fla. 325· Fla.· 1873-04-01 ·cited 6×
  In this action on a promissory note, the surviving partner of a mercantile firm sued the original makers and an endorser to recover on a note held as collateral security for pre-existing acceptances. The central dispute was whether the endorser, Sammis, remained liable given that
• Erick A. Palma, M.D. v. S. Fla. Pulmonary & Critical Care, LLC
  307 So. 3d 860· Fla. 3d DCA· 2020-09-16 ·cited 5×
  Physicians who signed promissory notes for their medical practice's line of credit were found to be accommodation indorsers, not directly liable to the practice for the outstanding debt. The court held that the practice, as the accommodated party, could not seek contribution or u
• Kvaerner Constr., Inc. v. Am. Safety Cas. Ins. Co.
  847 So. 2d 534· Fla. 5th DCA· 2003-04-17 ·cited 5×
  Kvaerner Construction appeals a summary judgment dismissing its claims against American Safety Casualty Insurance Company for breach of a performance bond issued for an unlicensed subcontractor. The court affirmed, holding that Kvaerner cannot indirectly enforce an unenforceable
• Shannon R. Ginn Constr. Co. v. Reliance Ins.
  51 F. Supp. 2d 1347· S.D. Fla.· 1999-03-17 ·cited 5×
  A principal in a surety agreement is not an 'insured' under Florida Statute § 624.155(1)(b)1 and therefore cannot bring a bad faith action against the surety. Furthermore, the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence of unfair claim settlement practices as a general busine
• Ins. Co. OF N. Am. v. Metro. Dade Cnty.
  705 So. 2d 33· Fla. 3d DCA· 1997-10-29 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the surety was discharged from liability because the county failed to provide timely notice of the discovered defects as required by the bond. This failure deprived the surety of its bargained-for right to address the defects.
• Centex-Rodgers Constr. Co. v. Hensel Phelps Constr. Co.
  591 So. 2d 1117· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-01-06 ·cited 5×
  Service of process on the Insurance Commissioner as agent for a surety is perfected when the Commissioner is served, not when the surety receives the forwarded process.
• Safeco Ins. Co. OF Am. v. Schwab
  739 F.2d 431· 9th Cir.· 1984-07-31 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the indemnity contract's clause providing that the indemnitor would pay upon demand an amount to be held as collateral security should be interpreted as a collateral security provision, not merely indemnity after loss.
• Gorman Co. OF Fort Lauderdale, Inc. v. Frank Maio Gen. Contractor, Inc.
  438 So. 2d 1018· Fla. 4th DCA· 1983-10-12 ·cited 5×
  A subcontractor is not an indispensable party to a supplier's action against the contractor and surety on a public construction payment bond, and the inadequacy of appeal due to the subcontractor's bankruptcy justifies certiorari review.
• United States v. Tilleraas
  709 F.2d 1088· 6th Cir.· 1983-06-17 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the government, acting as a surety-guarantor under the Federal Insured Student Loan Program, has six years from the date it paid the lender's claim to sue a defaulting borrower.
• Cont'l Cas. Co. v. Reddick
  196 So. 2d 239· Fla. 1st DCA· 1967-03-07 ·cited 5×
  This case involves an appeal by Continental Casualty Company (Continental) from jury verdicts related to a subcontract default. The court affirmed the jury's findings that Continental prevented a potential indemnitor, Raymond Diehl, from completing the subcontract and that Contin
• Allen v. SEE. In re Simmons
  196 F.2d 608· 10th Cir.· 1952-05-05 ·cited 5×
  A guarantor who pays a debt is subrogated to the creditor's secured position, even if payment occurs after bankruptcy filing.
• Ulrich v. Ulrich
  603 So. 2d 78· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-07-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a guaranty of payment is not triggered when the underlying note's payment is suspended by a subordination agreement, as there is no default.
• Ins. Co. OF N. Am. v. The United States
  951 F.2d 1244· Fed. Cir.· 1991-12-10 ·cited 4×
  A surety owes interest from the time a creditor properly demands payment under a suretyship contract, and this interest may increase the surety's obligation beyond the penal amount of the bond.
• SNS Contractors v. Algernon Blair, Inc.
  892 F.2d 430· 5th Cir.· 1990-01-25 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge would construe the documents as a security assignment, not imposing an obligation on the lender to pay the contractor unless the lender foreclosed on its security interest.
• FR. Winkler KG v. Stoller
  839 F.2d 1002· 3d Cir.· 1988-02-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the parol evidence rule barred Stoller's defense that his guarantee was a mere formality and would never be enforced, and that his 'per aval' signature constituted a personal guarantee waiving notice of dishonor.
• Scalea v. Scalea's Airport Serv., Inc.
  833 F.2d 500· 3d Cir.· 1987-11-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court failed to make adequate findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding the plaintiff's second and third theories of breach of contract, necessitating a remand.
• United States v. Blake Constr. Co., Inc.
  820 F.2d 139· 5th Cir.· 1987-06-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a supplier to a supplier, even with a guaranty agreement from a subcontractor, does not have a direct contractual relationship for Miller Act bond coverage or a conventional payment bond.
• Warner v. The Cent. Tr. Co.
  798 F.2d 167· 6th Cir.· 1986-08-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Warner's obligation on the letter of credit was contingent on the original loan terms, and material alterations without his consent could exonerate him. The court also found issues with the district court's interest calculations.
• In re White Motor Corp. v. White Motor Corp.
  731 F.2d 372· 6th Cir.· 1984-04-12 ·cited 4×
  The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation has the capacity as White Motor's co-debtor to file a proof of claim for unfunded pension benefits.
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Manion
  712 F.2d 295· 7th Cir.· 1983-07-14 ·cited 4×
  A guarantor is discharged from liability on a note extension if the extension constitutes a material alteration of their obligations and was made without their consent, even if they previously executed a continuing guaranty.
• Dobrow v. J.D. Bryant, Jr.
  427 So. 2d 809· Fla. 5th DCA· 1983-03-09 ·cited 4×
  Oscar and Georgette Dobrow appealed a summary judgment holding them liable for obligations under joint venture agreements for Banyan Bay and Silver Beach Enterprises. The court reversed, finding material factual disputes precluded summary judgment on Georgette's liability as an a
• United States v. GIL
  657 F.2d 712· 5th Cir.· 1981-09-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a surety company is bound by the apparent authority of its agents, even if they exceed internal limitations, unless the government is put on notice of those limitations. However, recovery is limited to the amount authorized by the agent's specific power of att
• Dravo Corp. v. Robert B. Kerris, Inc.
  655 F.2d 503· 3d Cir.· 1981-07-21 ·cited 4×
  A claimant must strictly comply with the notice provisions of a payment bond, and premature notice is insufficient. A third-party beneficiary claim requires clear intent from the contracting parties.
• In re Covington Grain Co., Inc. v. Wiley Deal
  638 F.2d 1362· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the denial of a petition to be substituted as a claimant is an appealable order under the collateral order doctrine, but affirmed the denial because NYTCO, as a bailee who failed to deliver secured goods, was primarily liable and not entitled to subrogation.
• Cobb Bank & Tr. Co. v. Am. Mfrs. Mut. Ins. Co.
  624 F.2d 722· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the surety bond, not being a negotiable instrument and having been assigned by an entity with no enforceable rights, could not be enforced by the assignee bank.
• AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Crabtree
  383 So. 2d 657· Fla. 1st DCA· 1980-04-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that evidence of a prior settlement, though insufficient for res judicata, should have been admitted to prove discharge of Aetna's obligations under the bond.
• Ford Motor Co. v. Auto Supply Co., Inc.
  615 F.2d 757· 8th Cir.· 1980-01-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that prejudgment interest should commence from the date of the last item in the account, not six months after the termination of the sales agreement, and affirmed the trial court's judgment on other grounds.
• Rossmoor Corp. v. Tri-County Concrete Prods., Inc.
  375 So. 2d 896· Fla. 4th DCA· 1979-10-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court was correct in entering the final judgment, affirming the decision that a valid oral contract existed between the parties.
• Overmyer v. Fid. & Deposit Co. OF Md.
  554 F.2d 539· 2d Cir.· 1977-05-03 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the Overmyers' federal action, finding their constitutional claims foreclosed by prior state court proceedings and Supreme Court precedent, and awarded double costs and attorney's fees for a frivolous appeal.
• United Bonding Ins. Co. v. Catalytic Constr. Co.
  533 F.2d 469· 9th Cir.· 1976-03-29 ·cited 4×
  The Assignment of Claims Act does not apply to claims against a private cost-plus government contractor, and a contractor may be liable for continuing payments to a contractor after notice of an equitable subrogee's rights if it abuses its discretion.
• Craftmark Homes, Inc. v. Nanticoke Constr. Co. Appeal of First Pa. Bank
  526 F.2d 790· 3d Cir.· 1975-12-01 ·cited 4×
  Submission of vouchers signed by the general contractor with FHA Form 2403 attached is not a condition precedent to recovery under the guarantee.