Skip to main content
· 2/14/1916

Hardie v. Bateson

Citations

  • 252 Pa. 317
  • 97 A. 464
  • 1916 Pa. LEXIS 613

Syllabus

<p>O ontract — Suretyship—Building contracts — Bonds — 0 onstruction — Liability of surety — Discontinuance of action against principals.</p> <p>1. In an action against the surety upon a contractor’s bond, where the contractor had defaulted, and plaintiff, the owner, had finished the work at a cost in excess of the contract price, it was no defense that certain payments for the work had been made by the owner to a party other than the contractor with the contractor’s consent; the surety was not thereby discharged, there being no evidence that it was prejudiced by such payments, especially where it appeared that the liability of the surety was thereby reduced.</p> <p>2. In such case a provision in the contract that for failure, refusal or neglect of the contractor to supply a sufficiency of properly skilled workmen, or failure to prosecute the work with promptness and diligence, the owner might terminate the employment of the contractor, enter upon the premises and finish the work and that the expenses incurred by the owner in so doing should be audited and certified by the architect, whose certificate thereof “shall be conclusive upon the parties,” did not require that where the contractor defaulted and abandoned the work, the expense of completing it should be audited by the architect.</p> <p>3. Where in such case, the bond provided that “until the expiration of the time within which liens or notices of liens may be filed, and until the discharge of such liens if any, the obligee shall at all times preserve and exercise all rights provided for his protection by the laws relating to liens of the state wherein said contract is to be performed,” the owner was not required to file a no-lien contract, and was properly allowed reimbursement for payments made in discharging mechanics’ liens filed by subcontractors and materialmen, particularly where it appeared that the contract which the surety company executed contemplated the filing of liens and contained no provision

Judges: Mestrézat, Moschzisker, Potter, Stewart

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.