Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

TRANSAMERICA INS. CO. v. MCKEESPORT HOUS. AUTH.

January 20, 1970

TRANSAMERICA INSURANCE COMPANY, a California corporation, Plaintiff,
v.
McKEESPORT HOUSING AUTHORITY, Defendant


Marsh, Chief Judge.


The opinion of the court was delivered by: MARSH

MARSH, Chief Judge.

 After non-jury trial, the court makes the following

 FINDINGS OF FACT and CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

 1. Plaintiff, Transamerica Insurance Company, is a corporation engaged in the business of writing labor and performance bonds, is a citizen of the State of California, and does not have a principal place of business in Pennsylvania.

 2. Plaintiff is successor by merger to the American Surety Company of New York and as such has succeeded to all rights and liabilities of said American Surety Company.

 3. Defendant is a public Authority, organized and existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, is a citizen of that state, and has its principal place of business therein.

 4. The United Construction Company (United) was a general contractor with whom the defendant originally contracted on or about October 19, 1959, to perform general construction work on apartments known as McKeesport Housing Project, said project being officially identified as PA-5-6.

 5. The plaintiff's predecessor, American Surety Company, became the surety on United's performance bond to the Authority. (The designation of plaintiff or plaintiff-surety is used hereafter to include the American Surety Company, as well as its successor Transamerica Insurance Company.)

 6. United was unable to perform, and on October 27, 1960, defendant placed said company in default in accordance with the contract. The plaintiff-surety was notified of the default. The defendant demanded that plaintiff-surety complete the work in accordance with the contract which United had failed to complete. *fn1" The plaintiff then notified the defendant that it had engaged the Arthur Venneri Company to complete the construction in accordance with the contract.

 7. Plaintiff assumed the obligations and responsibilities of United as set forth in the construction contract, and also became entitled to all the rights and emoluments properly due and owing United thereunder.

 8. By letter dated November 16, 1960 (defendant's Ex. 8), defendant terminated United's right to proceed under the contract. *fn2"

 9. The final adjusted contract price was in the amount of $2,887,157.54.

 10. It is stipulated that the amount in dispute is $83,711.15 and plaintiff-surety claims this amount with interest. The Authority denies any liability therefor. The disputed amount consists of the following items:

 
(a) Defendant has assessed liquidated damages for failure to complete on time and has ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.