Legal Opinion

Joseph J. Hock, Inc. v. Baltimore Contractors, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided January 13, 1969No. [No. 29, September Term, 1968.]PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtSingeey, J.

Chapter 10 of the Laws of 1959 repealed and re-enacted Maryland Code (1957) Art. 90, § 11 (the Act) which requires principal contractors to provide performance and payment bonds on all contracts for public work which exceed $5,000 in amount in order to protect subcontractors and materialmen.

Subsection (c) of the Act permits persons who have furnished labor and material to sue on the payment bond if they have not been paid within 90 days after the last labor was done or the last material furnished.

Subsection (d) provides that “* * * no such suit shall be commenced after the term of one year…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. R. P. Farnsworth & Co. v. Electrical Supply Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1940
  2. Peerless Insurance v. Board of County Commissioners Ex Rel. Ben Dyer Associates, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1968
  3. Baltimore County Department of Education v. Henry A. Knott, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1964
  4. Yale & Towne Manufacturing Co. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. of HartfordSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1933
  5. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Hamilton & Spiegel, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1966

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Antonio Carro, Inc. v. Jura Construction, Inc.Supreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1978

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

Powered by the Exa API