Legal Opinion
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Armstrong
Supreme Court of Alabama
Decided June 2, 1932No. 6 Div. 870, 871PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBouldin, J.
The action is against the surety on a contractor’s bond for the construction of public improvements under contract with a municipality. Gen. Acts 1927, p. 37.
On September 21, 1927, J. A. Taylor entered into a contract with the city of Birmingham for the construction of sanitary sewers, known as the Collegeville project. Appellant, United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company, became surety on his bond.
Taylor applied to a Birmingham bank, now Southern Bank & Trust Company, to finance him in the execution of the contract. Accordingly, on September 29th, the bank took an assignment in writing of…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Prairie State Bank v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Henningsen v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. of BaltimoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Labbe v. BernardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
- Maryland Casualty Co. v. DupreeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1931
- Ganley v. City of PipestoneSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- National Surety Corporation v. FisherSupreme Court of Missouri · 1958
- W. Harrison Price v. H. L. Coble Construction CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1963
- John E. Ballenger Const. Co. v. Joe F. Walters Const. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1938
- Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland v. Scott Brothers Construction Company, Alexander City BankCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1972
- Security Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Underwood Coal & Supply Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1943
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.