Cases 21 - 30 of 654
The United States of America for the use and benefit of CMR Construction & Roofing, LLC et al v. Colston Construction Inc. et al
as 2:2023cv00165
Plaintiff:
The United States of America for the use and benefit of CMR Construction & Roofing, LLC, CMR Construction & Roofing, LLC and United States of America
Defendant:
Colston Construction Inc. and Suretec Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 40 U.S.C. § 3131 Miller Act
Triton Marine Construction Corp v. Leebcor Services, LLC et al
as 4:2023cv00155
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, for the use and benefit of TRITON MARINE CONSTRUCTION CORP.,
Defendant:
Leebcor Services, LLC and The Cincinnati Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 40 U.S.C. § 3131 Miller Act
United States of America for the Use and Benefit of Pinnacle Environmental Corporation v. Volmar Construction, Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv10732
Plaintiff:
United States of America for the Use and Benefit of Pinnacle Environmental Corporation
Defendant:
Volmar Construction, Inc. and Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1352 Miller Act
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF NOUVEAU ELEVATOR INDUSTRIES, LLC v. VALIANT GROUP, LLC et al
as 2:2023cv22423
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF NOUVEAU ELEVATOR INDUSTRIES, LLC and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
VALIANT GROUP, LLC and COLONIAL SURETY COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Breach of Contract
United States of America for the Use and Benefit of Veit & Company, Inc. v. Drax, Inc. et al
as 0:2023cv03477
Plaintiff:
Veit & Company, Inc. and United States of America for the Use and Benefit of Veit & Company, Inc.
Defendant:
Drax, Inc. and Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 40 U.S.C. § 270 Miller Act
United States of America for the use and benefit of RQ Construction, LLC v. Siemens Government Technologies, Inc. et al
as 6:2023cv02118
Plaintiff:
United States of America for the use and benefit of RQ Construction, LLC
Defendant:
Siemens Government Technologies, Inc., Federal Insurance Company, Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland and others
Cause Of Action: 40 U.S.C. § 270 Miller Act
United States of America for the Use and Benefit of RSM Builders Supply Inc v. The Ross Group Construction Corporation, LLC et al
as 2:2023cv00174
Plaintiff:
United States of America for the use and benefit of R.S.M. Builders Supply, Inc. and United States of America for the Use and Benefit of RSM Builders Supply Inc
Defendant:
The Ross Group Construction Corporation, LLC and Continental Casualty Company
Cause Of Action: 40 U.S.C. § 3131 Miller Act
Holdings Management Co. et al v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company et al
as 1:2023cv01445
Plaintiff:
United States of America for the Use and Benefit of Holdings Management Co., H.M.C. Inc. and Holdings Management Company
Defendant:
Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and Continential Casualty Company
Cause Of Action: 40 U.S.C. § 3131 Miller Act
United States of America v. Globalnet and Associates, LLC, et al
as 5:2023cv02140
Plaintiff:
S.R. Bray, LLC, a California limited liability company dba Power Plus! and United States of America for the Use and Benefit of S.R. BRAY, LLC, a California limited liability company doing business as Power Plus!
Petitioner:
Defendant The Gray Insurance Company, a Louisiana corporation
Defendant:
Globalnet & Associates, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, DLC Electric, Inc., a California corporation, Globalnet and Associates, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Breach of Contract
ACS Alliance Const v. Cueto Consulting
as 23-50735
Plaintiff / Appellee:
ACS Alliance Construction Specialties, L.L.C., United States of America for the Use and Benefit of ACS Alliance Construction Specialties, L.L.C.
Defendant / Appellant:
Cueto Consulting & Construction, L.L.C. and Aegis Security Insurance Company
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.
