Legal Opinion
Lopez Castro v. Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided February 7, 2014No. Civil Action No. 2013-0818PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
JAMES E. BOASBERG, United States District Judge
Plaintiffs are laborers who worked for a third-tier subcontractor in the construction of a District of Columbia building. Believing that they were underpaid, they brought this action on May 31, 2013, against the two companies insuring the prime contractor’s construction-payment bond, alleging violations of the federal Davis-Bacon Act and the District of Columbia’s Little Miller Act. On June 24, Defendants filed Motions to Dismiss, arguing, inter alia, that the statute of limitations on Plaintiffs’ claims has expired and that…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Clifford F. MacEvoy Co. v. United States Ex Rel. Calvin Tomkins Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Universities Research Assn., Inc. v. CoutuSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- United States Ex Rel. Hill v. American Surety Co. of NYSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- United States v. Binghamton Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1954
- United States of America for the Use and Benefit of T.M.S. Mechanical Contractors, Inc., Cross-Appellee v. Millers Mutual Fire Insurance Company of Texas, Third-Party Cross-Appellant v. The Craftsmen, Inc., Third-Party and Joseph Breedlove, J.D. Richmond, Jr. And Doris D. Richmond, Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1991
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Lopez Castro v. Fidelity and Deposit Company of MarylandDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014