Legal Opinion

Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. New York City Housing Authority

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided April 18, 1956PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DIMOCK, District Judge.

Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, surety on the bond of CarusoStureey Corporation, a building contractor, brings this action to recover the sum of $46,392.51 from defendant New York City Housing Authority, hereinafter referred to as the owner. That sum is an amount equal to the unpaid balance of the contract price for heating and ventilating work that the contractor agreed to do at Ravenswood Houses. By its agreement with the owner, the building contractor had engaged not only to do the -required construction but also to pay its ..laborers and materialmen.…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Prairie State Bank v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  2. United States v. Munsey Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
  3. Henningsen v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. of BaltimoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
  4. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Triborough Bridge AuthorityNew York Court of Appeals · 1947
  5. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1952

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Wolverine Insurance Company v. PhillipsDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1958
  2. National Surety Corporation v. FisherSupreme Court of Missouri · 1958
  3. In Re Dutcher Construction CorporationDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1961
  4. Colusa-Glenn Production Credit Ass'n v. Phoenix InsuranceDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1956
  5. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. New York City Housing AuthorityDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1957

1 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