Daughtry v. Maryland Casualty Co.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
PARKER, Circuit Judge.
This was a suit by materialmen under a contractors’ bond. Prom an adverse decree of the court below they have appealed. The sole question presented by the appeal is whether the claims of materialmen are protected by the bond sued on. The facts are as follows:
Hudson & Scruggs, contractors, entered into a contract with the city of South Norfolk, Va., to do certain paving. The contract provided that they should furnish all the materials necessary for that purpose “at their own proper cost and expense.”' It contained a provision also that the city council might at any time…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Morganton Manufacturing & Trading Co. v. AndrewsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- Brick Co. v. . GentrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
- Ideal Brick Co. v. GentrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
- Maryland Casualty Co. v. FowlerCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1929
- United States v. StarrCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1927
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Maryland Casualty Co. v. City of South NorfolkCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1932
- Saint Paul Mercury Indemnity Company v. Wright Contracting CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1958
- Noland Company v. Realty CorporationSupreme Court of Virginia · 1966
- Maine Bonding & Casualty Co. v. Foundation Constructors, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1964
- Southwestern Sash & Door Co. v. American Employers' Ins.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1933
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.