Legal Opinion
Continental Casualty Co. v. Clarence L. Boyd Co.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided January 13, 1944No. 2788PublishedCited by 33 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PHILLIPS, Circuit Judge.
On May 3, 1941, the Central Construction Company 1 entered into a contract with the United States to construct certain improvements at Municipal Airport No. 1 in Tulsa, Oklahoma. On the same day, Central, as principal, and the Continental Casualty Company, 2 as surety, executed a payment bond pursuant to the requirements of the Miller Act, 40 U.S.C.A. §§ 270a and 270b, 49 Stat. 793, for the protection of all persons supplying labor and material in the prosecution of the work provided for in such contract.
Tom W. Kelly brought a suit to recover on the payment bond. A…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Illinois Surety Co. v. John Davis Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Brogan v. National Surety Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1918
- Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1937
- Maryland Casualty Co. v. Ohio River Gravel Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1927
- Taylor v. ConnettCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1921
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Atlantic Contracting & Material Co. v. Ulico Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2004
- United States of America for the Use of Weston & Brooker Company, a Corporation v. Continental Casualty CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1962
- International Harvester Co. v. L. G. DeFelice & Son, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1964
- McGee Steel Co. v. State Ex Rel. McDonald Industries Alaska, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1986
- Arizona Gunite Builders, Inc. v. Continental Casualty Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1969
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.