Wells Benz, Inc. v. United States ex rel. Mercury Electric Co.

Good Law
333 F.2d 89
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 2, 1964Nos. 18435, 18436California2,567 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Koelsch, J.

These are two separate suits which-were heard together, both here and in the district court. They involve four Miller-Act Claims [40 U.S.C. § 270a and § 270b], prosecuted by Mercury Electric-Company (Mercury), a subcontractor, against Wells Benz, Inc. and Dale Benz,. Inc. (Wells and Benz), the prime contractors, together with their surety, the-Fidelity and Casualty Company of New York. They also include counter-elaims-asserted by Wells and Benz. 1 The dis- *91 -fcriet court rendered judgment for Mercury on three of its claims and against Wells and Benz on all the counter-claims. ■Only Wells and Benz have appealed.

In December, 1958, Wells and Benz, as ;prime contractors, awarded Mercury, the subcontractor, contracts for the electrical 'work and equipment on several construction projects of the Federal Government • at Point Arguello and Point Mugu, California. There were four jobs, each of ■which was the subject of a separate -contract. They were known as the “Instrumentation Job,” the “Photo Tracking •Job,” the “Range Job” and the “Supply Department Job.” Mercury fully performed the contract for the Range Job, 'but before the others were completed 'Wells and Benz ordered it to…

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.