Skip to main content
· 4/24/1987

United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. United Penn Bank

Citations

  • 524 A.2d 958
  • 362 Pa. Super. 440
  • 5 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 778
  • 1987 Pa. Super. LEXIS 7740

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • noting that where a surety assumed performance on behalf of a defaulting contractor, the surety was entitled to recover any unpaid contract balance
  • noting that where a surety assumed performance on behalf of a defaulting contractor, the surety was entitled to recover any unpaid contract balance
  • holding corporate surety’s payment of unsecured claims of defaulting subcontractor’s suppliers would not confer upon surety interest in subcontractor’s inventory superior to that of bank which held perfected security interest in inventory
  • holding corporate surety's payment of unsecured claims of defaulting subcontractor's suppliers would not confer upon surety interest in subcontractor's inventory superior to that of bank which held perfected security interest in inventory
  • in construction contract context, “[b]y paying the contractor’s debts, the surety acquires the right of substitution to the position of the contractor’s creditors when he pays”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Wieand, Cercone, Hoffman

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.