Goerig

Goerig v. Continental Casualty Co.

Good Law
167 F.2d 930·1948 U.S. App. LEXIS 3224
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 5, 1948Nos. 11722-11726California1,779 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Denman, J.

These five appeals, each having identical issues, were briefed and argued together. Each suit was brought against the Continental Casualty Company, hereafter called Continental, under the Miller Act, 49 Stat. 793 et seq., 40 U.S.C. 270a, 270b, 40 U.S.C.A. §§ 270a, 270b, by the United States as use plaintiff for a subcontractor supplying labor or materials on government construction contracts made by a group of joint adventurers, of which the district court held appellants were members. In all, judgments were given against Continental on its bonds for the performance of the joint venture agreements. Continental cross-complained in each case and recovered judgments against the appellants for their agreements to indemnify Continental for liability on its bonds. Each appeal is from such a judgment on Continental’s cross-complaint. One of the appeals, No. 11,723, is also from a judgment against appellants on the complaint of a subcontractor supplier for whom the United States was the use plaintiff.

*932 Typical of the cases in. which Continental recovered on its cross-complaint is No. 11,726. Three co-partners, Sam Macri, Don Macri and Joe Macri, hereafter called the Macris, on…

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.