Legal Opinion

United States of America F/u/b of Dillon Construction Inc., a Corporation v. Continental Insurance Company, a Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

Decided November 18, 1985No. 85-5023PublishedCited by 15 opinions

Non-Argument Calendar.

1Opinion of the Court

GODBOLD, Chief Judge:

Plaintiff Dillon Construction Inc. sued defendant Continental under the Miller Act, 40 U.S.C. § 270a et seq., seeking payment for work it had done on a U.S. Army ammunition storage area in the Canal Zone. The district court entered judgment in favor of Dillon. We reverse.

I. Background

Craddock Construction International contracted with the U.S. Army to do construction at the area in question. Craddock, as required by the Miller Act, obtained a surety bond from defendant. Craddock subcontracted part of the job to Dillon. Dillon completed its work on the contract some time…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. United States of America for the Use of Georgia Electric Supply Company, Inc. v. United States Fidelity and Guaranty CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
  2. General Insurance Company of America v. United States for the Use of Audley Moore & SonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
  3. Sam Finley, Inc. v. Pilcher, Livingston & Wallace, Inc.District Court, S.D. Georgia · 1970
  4. US, ETC. v. EJT Constr. Co., Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1981

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Elliot Ray v. Marc ClementsCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2012
  2. Montes v. Vail Clinic, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2007
  3. United States v. Donald RavenCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
  4. MQ Construction Co. v. Intercargo InsuranceAppellate Court of Illinois · 2000
  5. Boluk v. HolderCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2011

10 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