About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (July 2017 through August 2018)

handle is hein.ali/retsgy0588 and id is 1 raw text is: SURETYSHIP AND GUARANTY 3D Generally Ct.Int'I Trade, 2017. Cit. generally in disc. The United States brought an action against surety, seeking to enforce defendant's obligations under a customs bond prepared and submitted as security for an importer's unpaid antidumping duties. This court granted summary judgment for the government, holding that the bond was valid and enforceable as a matter of law, and that the government was not required to reject the bond because of noncompliance with provisions regarding modifications to the bond. The court explained that principles of suretyship law as set forth in the Restatement Third of Suretyship and Guaranty guided courts in determining parties' obligations under customs bonds. United States v. International Fidelity Insurance Company, 273 F.Supp.3d 1170, 1180-1181. CHAPTER 1. TRANSACTIONS GOVERNED BY LAW OF SURETYSHIP AND GUARANTY § 1. Scope; Transactions Giving Rise to Suretyship Status D.D.C.2017. Cit. in sup. After subcontractor on a construction project went bankrupt, sub-subcontractor filed a claim under a payment bond that subcontractor obtained from sureties for the benefit of prime contractor, seeking to recover amounts due for its work on the project. Following a bench trial, this court awarded plaintiff damages, but denied plaintiff's subsequent motion for attorney's fees, holding that plaintiff failed to show that such fees were allowed under the payment bond, which covered amounts due for labor, material, or equipment used in the performance of the subcontract between prime contractor and subcontractor, rather than amounts due under the sub-subcontract between plaintiff and subcontractor. The court cited Restatement Third of Suretyship & Guaranty § 1 in explaining that defendants' obligations to plaintiff (as a third-party beneficiary of the payment bond) were defined by the obligations that subcontractor (as the obligee) owed to prime contractor (as the obligor) under the subcontract, which did not contain an attorney's fee provision, rather than by subcontractor's obligations to plaintiff under the sub-subcontract, which did contain such a provision. Paige International, Inc. v. XL Specialty Insurance Co., 267 F.Supp.3d 205, 214. CHAPTER 3. INCIDENTS OF SURETYSHIP STATUS TOPIC 3. OBLIGEE'S RIGHTS AGAINST SECONDARY OBLIGOR-GENERALLY, AND AS AFFECTED BY ACTS OF OBLIGEE TITLE B. SURETYSHIP DEFENSES § 41. Modification of Underlying Obligation Ct.Int'I Trade, 2017. Subsec. (b)(i) quot. in sup. The United States brought an action against surety, seeking to enforce defendant's obligations under a customs bond prepared and submitted as security for For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most