Legal Opinion

Whitaker-Merrell Co. v. Carl M. Geupel Construction Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1972No. 71-301PublishedCited by 215 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchneider, J.

Appellee Geupel was awarded a state highway construction contract and entered into a subcontract for paving with Davidson, who in turn purchased material and services from various materialmen, including Whitaker, Purdy, Basic and Standard Oil of Ohio. The latter were not paid in full by Davidson.

Whitaker sued Geupel as prime contractor, and Aetna as surety on its statutory bond, pursuant to R. C. 153.56. Geupel filed a third party complaint against Ohio Casualty, *185surety for Davidson, seeking reimbursement for whatever judgments it might be required to pay to Davidson’s ma-terialmen. Purdy,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Kam Koon Wan v. E. E. Black, LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1950
  2. State ex rel. City of Cincinnati v. Butler Water Conservancy DistrictOhio Supreme Court · 1966

3Cited by215 opinions

  1. Noble v. ColwellOhio Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Chef Italiano Corp. v. Kent State Univ.Ohio Supreme Court · 1989
  3. In re MurrayOhio Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Alexander v. Buckeye Pipe Line Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Levine v. BeckmanOhio Court of Appeals · 1988

210 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