Legal Opinion
United States Ex Rel. R. Rudnick & Co. v. Daniel, Urbahn, Seelye & Fuller
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided April 12, 1973No. 72 C 312PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER
AUSTIN, District Judge.
Plaintiff, a corporation engaged in the general construction business, brought this suit under the Miller Act, 40 U.S.C. § 270a et seq. There are four defendants, one a partnership, Daniel, Urbahn, Seelye and Fuller (hereinafter referred to as “DUSAF”), alleged to be composed of the other defendants, which are another partnership and two corporations. The complaint has previously been dismissed as to five other defendants and two others were granted summary judgment.
The complaint alleges that DUSAF was the prime contractor for the United…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- S&E Contractors, Inc. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- United States of America, for the Use and Benefit Of, Statham Instruments, Inc. v. Western Casualty & Surety CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1966
- United States of America, for the Use of the B's Company v. Cleveland Electric Company of South CarolinaCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1967
- Standard Ins. Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- United States v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1976
- United States v. SolomonCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1977
- United States v. City of PhiladelphiaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1979
- In Re Ocean Shipping Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1980
- United States Ex Rel. DDC Interiors, Inc. v. Dawson Construction Co.District Court, D. Colorado · 1995
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.