Barry v. Columbia Casualty Co.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Florida
Writing for the CourtTERRELL, J.
Citation133 So. 852,101 Fla. 168
Decision Date13 April 1931
PartiesBARRY v. COLUMBIA CASUALTY CO. et al.

133 So. 852

101 Fla. 168

BARRY
v.
COLUMBIA CASUALTY CO. et al.

Florida Supreme Court, Division B.

April 13, 1931


Error to Circuit Court, Orange County; Frank A. Smith, Judge.

Action by the Right Reverend Patrick Barry, Bishop of St. Augustine, against the Columbia Casualty Company and another. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff brings error.

Reversed.

Syllabus by the Court.

SYLLABUS

Under the law of this state, the obligee may sue on a construction bond without joining with him the person or persons for whose benefit the bond was executed.

COUNSEL

[101 Fla. 168] Pleus & Williams, of Orlando, for plaintiff in error.

Maguire & Voorhis, of Orlando, for defendants in error.

OPINION

TERRELL, J.

Plaintiff in error brought a common-law action against defendants in error in the circuit court of Orange county. A demurrer to the declaration was sustained, [101 Fla. 169] final judgment was entered, and writ of error taken to that judgment.

The defendants in error were principal and surety on an indemnity bond, being the same bond and contract as that involved in Johnson Electric Company, Inc., v. Columbia Casualty Company et al. (Fla.) 133 So. 850, decided this date. Except as given in this opinion the facts in this case are identical to those in the case last mentioned. The sole question of whether or not there was a misjoinder in this cause is the only one we deem it essential to answer, as all others were fully answered in Johnson Electric Company, Inc., v. Columbia Casualty Company et al., supra.

In the instant case the Right Reverend Patrick Barry, on behalf of subcontractors and materialmen, sues Columbia Casualty Company as surety and Louis Fleisher Construction Company as principal on the construction bond and contract as above referred to. There were seven of these subcontractors and materialmen, all having contracts with the principal contractor. Each count of the declaration is predicated on the subcontracts, the damages suffered, the posting of the bond, the alleged fact that it protected subcontractors and materialmen, the breach of the contract, and such other allegations as are sufficient to state a cause of action. In Johnson Electric Company, Inc., v. Columbia Casualty Company et al., we held that subcontractors were protected by this bond.

The contention is that such a declaration constitutes a misjoinder both as to parties plaintiff and as to causes of action.

Section 2585, Revised...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 practice notes
  • Thomas v. Carlton
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • September 13, 1932
    ...the suit without [143 So. 788] joining the person or persons having a beneficial interest therein. Barry v. Columbia Casualty Co. et al., 101 Fla. 168, 133 So. 852; Perry v. Woodberry, 26 Fla. 84, 7 So. 483. If an accounting should be had in this case, any funds coming into the hands of the......
  • U.S. Gypsum Co. v. Columbia Cas. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • June 10, 1936
    ...was made out (see Johnson Electric Co. v. Columbia Casualty Co., 101 Fla. 186, 133 So. 850, 77 A.L.R. 1; Barry v. Columbia Casualty Co., 101 Fla. 168, 133 So. 852); so a final judgment in the surety company's favor rendered on demurrer sustained to plaintiff's declaration in this case was, ......
  • Johnson Electric Co., Inc. v. Columbia Casualty Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • April 14, 1931
    ...county court in defendants' favor, and plaintiff petitions for certiorari. Judgment quashed. See, also, Barry v. Columbia Casualty Co., 133 So. 852. Syllabus by the Court. SYLLABUS We have no statute authorizing or requiring provision for the protection of third parties in construction cont......
  • Fidelity & Cas. Co. of New York v. Plumbing Dept. Store, Inc.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • October 30, 1934
    ...cases of Johnson Electric Co. v. Columbia Casualty Co., 101 Fla. 186, 133 So. 850, 77 A. L. R. 1, and Barry v. Columbia Casualty Co., 101 Fla. 168, 133 So. 852, wherein the same doctrine was announced and the same rule enforced in favor of a materialman suing on a common-law contractor's bo......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
9 cases
  • Thomas v. Carlton
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • September 13, 1932
    ...the suit without [143 So. 788] joining the person or persons having a beneficial interest therein. Barry v. Columbia Casualty Co. et al., 101 Fla. 168, 133 So. 852; Perry v. Woodberry, 26 Fla. 84, 7 So. 483. If an accounting should be had in this case, any funds coming into the hands of the......
  • U.S. Gypsum Co. v. Columbia Cas. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • June 10, 1936
    ...was made out (see Johnson Electric Co. v. Columbia Casualty Co., 101 Fla. 186, 133 So. 850, 77 A.L.R. 1; Barry v. Columbia Casualty Co., 101 Fla. 168, 133 So. 852); so a final judgment in the surety company's favor rendered on demurrer sustained to plaintiff's declaration in this case was, ......
  • Johnson Electric Co., Inc. v. Columbia Casualty Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • April 14, 1931
    ...county court in defendants' favor, and plaintiff petitions for certiorari. Judgment quashed. See, also, Barry v. Columbia Casualty Co., 133 So. 852. Syllabus by the Court. SYLLABUS We have no statute authorizing or requiring provision for the protection of third parties in construction cont......
  • Fidelity & Cas. Co. of New York v. Plumbing Dept. Store, Inc.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • October 30, 1934
    ...cases of Johnson Electric Co. v. Columbia Casualty Co., 101 Fla. 186, 133 So. 850, 77 A. L. R. 1, and Barry v. Columbia Casualty Co., 101 Fla. 168, 133 So. 852, wherein the same doctrine was announced and the same rule enforced in favor of a materialman suing on a common-law contractor's bo......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT