Continental Casualty Co. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.

Good Law
1966 Cal. App. LEXIS 1710·243 Cal. App. 2d 565·52 Cal. Rptr. 533
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 21, 1966Civ. 11110California1,800 words

Opinion

Opinion

Regan, J.

The question of law presented is whether the surety of a subcontractor is liable on its bond to the general contractor’s surety (plaintiffs herein) for unpaid bills for construction materials used in a project built pursuant to the federal Capehart Act where the subcontractor failed to pay for such materials.

A judgment of dismissal was entered following the sustaining of defendant’s general demurrer without leave to amend. (1) plaintiffs Continental Casualty Company and Fidelity & Casualty Company of New York (herein “Continental”)

A summary of the allegations disclosed by the single cause of action in plaintiffs’ second amended complaint shows that were surety to a contract between the prime contractor, Hal B. Hayes & Associates, Ine. (herein “Hal Hayes”), and the United States, under a Capehart Act construction project at Beale Air Force Base; and (2) Continental’s bonds were issued pursuant to the provisions of the Capehart Act and are statutory bonds. Hal Hayes assigned the entire contract to Hayes-Cal Builders, Inc. (herein “Hayes-Cal”) and Hayes-Cal subcontracted certain plumbing work to Country Boys Builders Supply (herein “Country Boys”). Hartford Accident & Indemnity…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.