From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Standard Accident Ins. Co.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Jul 8, 1958
257 F.2d 78 (3d Cir. 1958)

Opinion

No. 12578.

Argued June 9, 1958.

Decided July 8, 1958.

Samuel H. Nelson, Newark, N.J., for appellant.

Louis Auerbacher, Jr., Newark, N.J., for appellee.

Before KALODNER, STALEY and HASTIE, Circuit Judges.


In this action under the Miller Act, 49 Stat. 793, 40 U.S.C.A., § 270a et seq., a subcontractor seeks to recover on the special bond which the statute requires principal contractors to furnish. It is admitted that the complaint was filed more than a year after the date of final settlement of the prime contract as certified by the Comptroller General, despite the express provision of the Miller Act that "* * no such suit shall be commenced after the expiration of one year after the date of final settlement of such contract." 40 U.S.C.A. § 270b(b). The district court properly held that this suit is barred by the statutory time limitation. Accord, United States for Use of Soda v. Montgomery, 3 Cir., 1958, 253 F.2d 509; Peerless Casualty Co. v. United States, 1 Cir., 1957, 241 F.2d 811.

Judgment will be affirmed.


Summaries of

United States v. Standard Accident Ins. Co.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Jul 8, 1958
257 F.2d 78 (3d Cir. 1958)
Case details for

United States v. Standard Accident Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America (for the Use and on Behalf of B. KATCHEN IRON…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Date published: Jul 8, 1958

Citations

257 F.2d 78 (3d Cir. 1958)

Citing Cases

U.S. v. Edward R. Marden Corp.

This ruling has been followed by the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in United States, f/u/b/o…

U.S. James E. Simon Co. v. Ardelt-Horn Const. Co.

While it may be that any suit on a bond furnished in accordance with the Miller Act must meet all the…