Legal Opinion

Carolina Builders Corp. v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 19, 1952No. 454PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBahuhill, J.

While the bond in question grants laborers and mate-rialmen the right to maintain an action against defendant, this does not change the status of defendant as a surety and make it a principal debtor. To entitle a materialman to recover from the surety on a performance bond, he must allege and prove a debt due by the contractor for material furnished him for use in the performance of his contract with the owner.

The liability of the surety does not rest solely upon the terms of its bond. It grows out of and is dependent upon the terms of the contract executed by its principal. If there has been…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Brick Co. v. . GentrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  2. Ideal Brick Co. v. GentrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  3. Dixon v. . HorneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920
  4. Mfg. Co. v. . BlaylockSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  5. McCausland v. R. A. Brown Construction Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1916

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Clemmons v. Life Insurance Company of GeorgiaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  2. RGK, Inc. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
  3. SALEM REALTY COMPANY v. BatsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  4. Brevard v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  5. Edgewood Knoll Apartments, Inc. v. BraswellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API