Legal Opinion

United States Ex Rel. N.E.W. Interstate Concrete, Inc. v. EUI Corp.

District Court, S.D. Indiana

Decided March 28, 2000No. TH 98-104-C-T/HPublished

1Opinion of the Court

ENTRY DISCUSSING MOTION TO DISMISS, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

TINDER, District Judge.

This matter comes before the court on the Motion to Dismiss, Or in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants, Austin Company (“Austin”) and Seaboard Surety Company, Inc. (“Seaboard”). Austin and Seaboard argue that Plaintiffs, United States for the Use and Benefit of N.E.W. Interstate Concrete, Inc., and N.E.W. Interstate Concrete, Inc. (“N.E.W.”), failed to properly and/or timely comply with the notice requirements of the Miller Act, 40 U.S.C. §§ 270a-f. After…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Sandra L. Waldridge v. American Hoechst Corp.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
  4. Illinois Surety Co. v. John Davis Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917
  5. Fleisher Engineering & Construction Co. v. United States Ex Rel. HallenbeckSupreme Court of the United States · 1940

24 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