Legal Opinion
United States of America, for the Use and Benefit of Blue Circle West, Inc. v. Tucson Mechanical Contracting Inc., an Arizona Corporation, Dba Tmci
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided December 19, 1990No. 89-15408PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KOZINSKI, Circuit Judge:
We consider the adequacy of a supplier’s notice to a contractor under the Miller Act.
Facts
Tucson Mechanical (TMCI) was the prime contractor for a construction project at the Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Arizona. TMCI, as principal, and Fairmont Insurance Company, as surety, executed a payment bond to guarantee payment to all those supplying labor and materials to the project. The bond ran in favor of the United States as obligee and was filed with the Air Force contracting office. Under the Miller Act, 40 U.S.C. §§ 270a et seq., such bonds are required of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Torres v. Oakland Scavenger Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Clifford F. MacEvoy Co. v. United States Ex Rel. Calvin Tomkins Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Meehan v. County of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
- Leslie S. Bowden, Trustee in Bankruptcy for the Estate of Frank T. Hickey, Inc., Bankrupt, Twaits-Morrison-Knudsen-Macco, Morrison Knudsen Company, Inc., MacCo Corporation, Ford J. Twaits Co., Ford J. Twaits, Individually and as Trustee, Edna M. Twaits, Jane Twaits Lataillade, Carl H. Wittenberg and Carl H. Wittenberg, Jr., as Partners Associated in Business Under the Common Name and Style of Ford J. Twaits Co. And Fidelity & Deposit Company of Maryland v. United States of America for the Use of Emmett J. Malloy, United States of America for the Use of Emmett J. Malloy, Cross-Appellant v. Leslie S. Bowden, Trustee in Bankruptcy, Etc., Cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1956
- National Center for Immigrants' Rights, Inc. v. Immigration & Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Ragan v. Tri-County Excavating, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995
- All Pacific Trading, Inc. v. Vessel M/V Hanjin YosuCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
- All Pacific Trading, Inc. v. Vessel M/V Hanjin YosuCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
- United States for the Use and Benefit of S&g Excavating, Inc. v. The Seaboard Surety CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2001
- Ramona Equipment Rental, Inc. Ex Rel. United States v. Carolina Casualty InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.