Title Guaranty & Surety Co. v. United States ex rel. General Electric Co.

Citations

• 187 F. 98
• 109 C.C.A. 106
• 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 4488

Syllabus

<p>1. United States (§ 67*) — Contractors for Public Works — Actions on Bond.</p> <p>The limitation contained in Act Feb. 24, 1905, c. 778, 33 Stat. 811 (U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1909, p. 948). amendatory of Act Aug. 13, 1S94, c. 280, 28 Stat. 278 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 2523), relating to actions on bonds of government contractors by subcontractors, is not retroactive, and does not affect an action on a bond given before its enactment, although supplemental contracts were made afterwards, where they were with the surety’s consent, and expressly provided that they should not affect the bond, which should remain in effect as though the modifications had been included in and made a part of the original contract.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see United States, Dee. Dig. § 67.*]</p> <p>2. United States (§ 67*) — Contractors for Public Work —Actions onBond.</p> <p>A subcontractor for public work, entitled to sue the surety on the statutory bond given by the contractor, did not lose his right of action by proving his claim against the estate of the contractor in bankruptcy [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see United States, Dec. Dig. § 67.*]</p> <p>3. Courts (§ 325*) — Federal Courts — District of Suit — Waiver of Objection.</p> <p>A defendant, sued in a federal court in Pennsylvania by a citizen of another state, in a district other than that of its residence, in an action of which the,court has jurisdiction by reason of diversity of citizenship and the amount iu controversy, waives objection to the district of suit by filing an affidavit of defense, invoking the jurisdiction of the court to determine questions going to the merits.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Courts, Cent. Dig. § 884; Dee. Dig. § 325.*</p> <p>Waiver of right as to district in which suit may be brought, see notes to Memphis Sav. Bank v. I-Iouchens, 52 C. C. A. 1.92; McPhee & McGinnity Co. v. Union Pac. R. Co., 87 C. C. A. 634.]</p>