Illinois Surety Co. v. John Davis Co.
Citations
- 244 U.S. 376
- 37 S. Ct. 614
- 61 L. Ed. 1206
- 1917 U.S. LEXIS 1649
Syllabus
<p>The purpose of the' Act of February 24, 1905, 33 Stat. 811, is to provide security for the claims of all persons who furnish labor or mate.rial oh public works of the United States; the act, and bonds given under it, are to be construed liberally to effectuate this purpose; and the release of sureties through mere technicalities is not to be encouraged.</p> <p>S, while conducting his business under, supervision of a creditors’ committee, entered into a contract with the United States for the doing of certain work, and gave bond with surety to secure claims for labor and materials under the Act of February 24, 1905, supra. After part performance of the contract, he and the creditors formed a corporation to take over his affairs, which, without the consent of the United States or the surety, received a transfer of all his business and assets, and thereafter under the management of S, as president, and the control of the creditors through the board of directors, continued for a time to perform the contract. Held: (1) That in view of § 3737, Rev. Stats., the transfer could not effect an assignment of the contract but amounted at most to a subletting.</p> <p>(2) That as the responsibility of the contractor under the contract and the actual management of the business were hot changed, nor the surety prejudiced, the transfer, did not operate to discharge the surety from past or future liability.</p> <p>(3) That labor and materials furnished in the prosecution of the work under the contract, after the transfer of the contractor’s business to the corporation, were to be regarded as furnished to him, within the meaning of the Act of February 24, 1905, supra, as well as to the corporation, and that the latter, besides, might be deemed the successor of the contractor within the condition of the bond, binding him “his heirs, successors,” etc.</p> <p>Questions of liability to pay interest under a bond given to secure pay- . ment for labor and materials, furnished under a const
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting under the federal Miller Act’s predecessor statute that “he who has supplied [labor and materials] to a subcontractor may claim under the bond, even if the subcontractor has been fully paid”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Brandeis, Van Devanter McReynolds
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
215 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- F. D. Rich Co. v. United States Ex Rel. Industrial Lumber Co.Supreme Court· 1974-05-28· cited 1,056×
- Clifford F. MacEvoy Co. v. United States Ex Rel. Calvin Tomkins Co.Supreme Court· 1944-04-24· cited 466×
- Fleischmann Construction Co. v. United States Ex Rel. ForsbergSupreme Court· 1926-03-01· cited 226×
- Fleisher Engineering & Construction Co. v. United States Ex Rel. HallenbeckSupreme Court· 1940-11-12· cited 167×
- American Surety Co. v. Westinghouse Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court· 1935-11-11· cited 91×
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. United StatesTenth Circuit· 1952-12-30· cited 62×
- United States of America, for the Use and Benefit Of, Statham Instruments, Inc. v. Western Casualty & Surety CompanySixth Circuit· 1966-04-12· cited 61×
- R. P. Farnsworth & Co. v. Electrical Supply Co.Fifth Circuit· 1940-05-18· cited 52×
- Glassell-Taylor Co. v. Magnolia Petroleum Co.Fifth Circuit· 1946-01-23· cited 49×
- United States of America for the Use and Benefit of J. P. Byrne & Co., Inc. v. Fire Association of PhiladelphiaSecond Circuit· 1958-10-31· cited 45×
- United States of America for the Use of Weston & Brooker Company, a Corporation v. Continental Casualty CompanyFourth Circuit· 1962-05-08· cited 43×
- Houston Fire and Casualty Insurance Company v. United StatesFifth Circuit· 1954-12-22· cited 42×
- United States v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance CompanyFourth Circuit· 1996-06-06· cited 41×
- D & L Construction Company v. Triangle Electric Supply Company, Inc.Eighth Circuit· 1964-06-22· cited 40×
- Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. Co. v. United StatesFifth Circuit· 1937-03-03· cited 39×
- United States of America for and on Behalf of Mississippi Road Supply Co. v. H. R. Morgan, Inc. And U. S. Fidelity and Guaranty Co.Fifth Circuit· 1976-11-12· cited 37×
- Davis Cattle Co., Inc. v. Great Western Sugar CompanyD. Colorado· 1975-05-06· cited 37×
- Gary Hay Grain Co., Inc. v. CarlsonMontana Supreme Court· 1927-04-13· cited 36×
- Standard Ins. Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1938-01-03· cited 35×
- Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. N. O. Nelson Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court· 1934-02-05· cited 33×
Cites
12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- United States Ex Rel. Texas Portland Cement Co. v. McCordSupreme Court· 1914-04-06· cited 178×
- Illinois Surety Co. v. United States Ex Rel. PeelerSupreme Court· 1916-02-21· cited 147×
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. United States Ex Rel. Struthers Wells Co.Supreme Court· 1908-04-06· cited 140×
- Title Guaranty & Trust Co. of Scranton v. Crane Co.Supreme Court· 1910-12-19· cited 133×
- Equitable Surety Co. v. United States Ex Rel. McMillanSupreme Court· 1914-06-22· cited 102×
- Mankin v. United States Ex Rel. Ludowici-Celadon Co.Supreme Court· 1910-01-17· cited 81×
- Hardaway v. National Surety Co.Supreme Court· 1909-01-04· cited 80×
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. United States Ex Rel. BartlettSupreme Court· 1913-12-01· cited 75×
- United States v. Congress Construction Co.Supreme Court· 1911-12-04· cited 65×
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. United States for the Benefit of KenyonSupreme Court· 1907-02-25· cited 41×
- United States Ex Rel. Alexander Bryant Co. v. New York Steam Fitting Co.Supreme Court· 1914-12-07· cited 38×
- Title Guaranty & Surety Co. v. United States Ex Rel. Harlan & HollingsworthSupreme Court· 1913-05-12· cited 4×
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.