United States, ex rel. Standard Furniture Co. v. Aetna Indemnity Co.

Citations

• 40 Wash. 87
• 82 P. 171
• 1905 Wash. LEXIS 942

Syllabus

<p>Statutes — U. S. Statutes Requiring Bond oe Contractor on Public Work — Construction—Protection oe Materialmen. The act of Aug. 13, 1894, 28 Stat. 278, requiring a bond of contractors on public work, is to be liberally construed, and in the case of a contract to build and furnish light-house keepers’ residences, extends to parties who supplied the contractor with furniture, although the same does not become a part of the permanent structure.</p> <p>Indemnity — Guaranteeing Federal Contract — Bond Conditioned to Perform Contract and Pay eor Labor and Material — Construction — Supplying Furniture Required by Contract — Action on Bond, by Materialmen. An action upon a bond guaranteeing the performance of a Federal contract may be maintained in the name of the United States for the benefit of one who has furnished the contractor with furniture required in the contract, whether or not the same is contemplated by 28 Stat. 278, requiring bonds on public work for the benefit of materialmen and laborers.</p> <p>Indemnity — Principal and Surety- — Extension oe Time eor Payment — Discharge oe Surety. A compensated surety company guaranteeing the performance of a contractor’s bond is not discharged by extending the time for payment by the contractor.</p> <p>Same — Trial — Evidence — Proof of Indulgence and Unusual Credit to Contractor — Admissibility. An unusual indulgence and extension of time to a contractor, operating to the prejudice of a surety, cannot be shown to discharge the surety, when it is not pleaded.</p> <p>Pleading — Amendment. Where a demurrer to a defense has been sustained, and no amendment is offered until the trial, it is not an abuse of discretion to refuse to allow a trial amendment, when the adverse party makes a claim of surprise.</p>