Ninth Circuit Contract Cases

Miller Act Cases, Dockets and Filings
Cases filed
Cases 31 - 40 of 1,563
DMS-BKL Drywall & Interior Systems, Inc. et al v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company et al
as 1:2023at00589
Plaintiff: DMS-BKL Drywall & Interior Systems, Inc. and The United States of America for the Use and Benefit of DMS-BKL Drywall & Interior Systems, Inc.
Defendant: Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and Solpac Construction, Inc. dba Soltek Pacific Construction Company
Cause Of Action: 40 U.S.C. § 270 Miller Act
Type: Contract Miller Act
The United States of America for the Use and Benefit of DMS-BKL Drywall & Interior Systems, Inc., et al. v. Solpac Construction, Inc., et al. We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2023cv01050
Plaintiff: The United States of America for the Use and Benefit of DMS-BKL Drywall & Interior Systems, Inc. and DMS-BKL Drywall & Interior Systems, Inc.
Defendant: Solpac Construction, Inc. a California Corporation Doing business as Soltek Pacific Construction Company and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 40 U.S.C. § 270 Miller Act
Type: Contract Miller Act
Stormwater Plans LLC v. Cincinnati Insurance Company et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2023cv01184
Plaintiff: Stormwater Plans LLC on behalf of the United States of America doing business as SWP Contracting & Paving and Stormwater Plans LLC United States for the use and benefit of Stormwater Plans doing business as SWP Contracting & Paving
Defendant: Cincinnati Insurance Company and Arrow Indian Contractors
Cause Of Action: 40 U.S.C. § 3131 Miller Act
T.B. Penick & Sons, Inc. v. Swinerton Builders et al
as 4:2023cv03019
Plaintiff: T.B. Penick & Sons, Inc.
Defendant: Swinerton Builders, Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, Zurich American Insurance Company and others
Cause Of Action: 40 U.S.C. § 270 Miller Act
Type: Contract Miller Act
Access Limited Construction v. CJW Construction, Inc. et al
as 3:2023cv01124
Plaintiff: Access Limited Construction
Defendant: CJW Construction, Inc., Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, Does 1 to 25, inclusive and others
Cause Of Action: 40 U.S.C. § 3131 Bonds of contractors of public buildings
Type: Contract Miller Act
Herman Construction Group, Inc. v. Dahl Air Conditioning, Inc. et al
as 2:2023cv03243
Plaintiff: Herman Construction Group, Inc., a California corporation and Herman Construction Group, Inc.
Defendant: Dahl Air Conditioning, Inc., a California corporation, U.S. Specialty Insurance Company, a Texas corporation, Dahl Air Conditioning, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Breach of Contract
Type: Contract Miller Act
United States of America v. RT Contractor Corp et al
as 2:2023cv02768
Plaintiff: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, for the Use and Benefit of APS CONSTRUCTION, INC.
Defendant: RT CONTRACTOR CORP., a California corporation and Great American Insurance Company, an Ohio corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Type: Contract Miller Act
United States of America v. RT Contractor Corp et al
as 8:2023cv00648
Plaintiff: United States of America and APS Construction Inc.
Defendant: RT Contractor Corp, Great American Insurance Company and Does 1 to 10 inclusive
Cause Of Action: 40 U.S.C. § 270 Miller Act
Type: Contract Miller Act
United States of America et al v. Fidelity & Deposit Company of Maryland We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2023cv05308
Plaintiff: D&D Construction I, Inc., United States of America and D&D Construction I Inc
Defendant: Fidelity & Deposit Company of Maryland
Cause Of Action: 40 U.S.C. § 270 Miller Act
Type: Contract Miller Act
United States of America v. Hudson Insurance Group We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2023cv00018
Plaintiff: United States of America
Defendant: Hudson Insurance Group
Cause Of Action: 40 U.S.C. § 270 Miller Act
Type: Contract Miller Act

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?