Augusta Iron and Steel Works, Inc. v. Employers Ins. of Wausau, 87-8154
| Decision Date | 15 January 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. 87-8154,87-8154 |
| Citation | 835 F.2d 855 |
| Parties | AUGUSTA IRON AND STEEL WORKS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, Cross-Appellant, v. EMPLOYERS INSURANCE OF WAUSAU, Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit |
John V. Burch, Bovis, Kyle & Burch, Matthew D. Williams, Atlanta, Ga., for defendant-appellant, cross-appellee.
Ted H. Clarkson, Knox & Zacks, Augusta, Ga., for plaintiff-appellee, cross-appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia.
Before HILL and FAY, Circuit Judges, and ALLGOOD *, Senior District Judge.
This case comes to us on motions for summary judgment. The trial court found that the defendant, Employers Insurance of Wausau ("Wausau"), was liable for nearly $100,000 in interest payments. The trial court also found, however, that Wausau withheld the contested payments in good faith. Wausau appeals its liability for the interest payments; plaintiff, Augusta Iron and Steel Works, Inc. ("Augusta"), cross-appeals the finding of good faith. We affirm the summary judgment on the good faith issue but reverse the summary judgment for liability of interest since on that issue there still remains a material issue of fact.
On March 9, 1982, Augusta entered into a contract with Williams Bridge Company, Inc. ("Williams Bridge") to supply steel for the widening of several interstate bridges in Atlanta, Georgia. Williams Bridge originally agreed to pay $770,000 for the steel and to make the payments following the receipt of each shipment of steel. The contract provided that Augusta had the option of charging interest on past due accounts at the rate of 1.5% per month (18% PER ANNUM). WAUSAU INSURED WIlliams bridge's payment of the contract.
The first shipment of steel occurred on June 18, 1982. The first payment was for $186,981.41 and was due on July 10, 1982. Payment, however, was not made until August 27, 1982. When Williams Bridge finally made the payment, Augusta credited it against the principal. The records indicate that every other payment was also late and that Augusta applied all the payments against the principal and not against the interest. Williams Bridge's last payment, which left an unpaid balance of $13,276.40, took place in November, 1984.
Williams Bridge's financial condition deteriorated following the November payment, and it was forced to file for bankruptcy in June of 1985. Only one month earlier, Augusta had sent its very first written notice to Williams Bridge demanding interest on the late payments. After Williams Bridge filed for bankruptcy, Augusta demanded payment from Wausau for the remaining principal of $13,276.40 plus the total accrued interest. Wausau has paid the principal but contests the interest charges.
This case raises a sophisticated question of Georgia law: Whether a surety can be liable for the interest on delinquent payments without first receiving notice that the insured's payments are untimely. Both parties have ably addressed this question; however, we are unable to reach the issue because there are disputed material facts that prevent a summary judgment.
We must view the evidence and all factual inferences that flow from the evidence in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion for summary judgment. Clark v. Union Mutual Life Insurance Co., 692 F.2d 1370, 1372 (11th Cir.1982). "If reasonable minds might differ on the inferences arising from undisputed facts, then the court should deny summary judgment." Id. We believe that under the undisputed facts a fact finder could reasonably draw the inference that Augusta had waived its option to collect the interest for the late payments. The fact finder could base this inference on the fact that (1) Augusta never carried the interest charges in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bischoff v. Florida, 6:98CV583-ORL-28JGG.
...a genuine issue of material fact, then the court should not grant the summary judgment motion. Augusta Iron and Steel Works v. Employers Insurance of Wausau, 835 F.2d 855, 856 (11th Cir. 1988). A dispute about a material fact is "genuine" if the "evidence is such that reasonable jury could ......
-
Silverstein v. Gwinnett Hosp. Authority
...drawn therefrom do not create a genuine issue of material fact warranting trial. See Augusta Iron & Steel Works, Inc. v. Employers Insurance of Wausau, 835 F.2d 855, 856 (11th Cir.1988) (per curiam); Carlin Communication, 802 F.2d at 1356; Warrior Tombigbee Transportation Co. v. M/V Nan Fun......
-
Bolick v. Brevard County Sheriff's Dept.
...a genuine issue of material fact, then the court should not grant the summary judgment motion. Augusta Iron and Steel Works v. Employers Insurance of Wausau, 835 F.2d 855, 856 (11th Cir.1988). A dispute about a material fact is "genuine" if the "evidence is such that a reasonable jury could......
-
Molloy v. Allied Van Lines, Inc
...a genuine issue of material fact, then the court should not grant the summary judgment motion. Augusta Iron and Steel Works v. Employers Insurance of Wausau, 835 F.2d 855, 856 (11th Cir. 1988). A dispute about a material fact is "genuine" if the "evidence is such that a reasonable jury coul......
-
Formalism Versus Pragmatism in Evidence: Reconsidering the Absolute Ban on the Use of Extrinsic Evidence to Prove Impeaching, Untruthful Acts That Have Not Resulted in a Conviction
...See also Samples v. City of Atlanta, 846 F.2d 1328, 1330 (11th Cir. 1988); Augusta Iron and Steel Works, Inc. v. Emp'rs Ins. of Wausau, 835 F.2d 855, 856 (11th Cir. 1988); J. C. Gibson Plastering Co., Inc. v. XL Specialty Ins. Co., 521 F. Supp. 2d 1326 (M.D. Fla. 8. Dey v. Colt Const. and D......