E. Steel Constructors, Inc. v. Int'l Fid. Ins. Co.
Citation | 282 A.3d 827 |
Decision Date | 01 September 2022 |
Docket Number | 998 MDA 2020, No. 1034 MDA 2020 |
Parties | EASTERN STEEL CONSTRUCTORS, INC., Appellant v. INTERNATIONAL FIDELITY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee Eastern Steel Constructors, Inc., Appellee v. International Fidelity Insurance Company, Appellant |
Court | Superior Court of Pennsylvania |
Brian S. Jablon, Severna Park, MD, for Eastern Steel, appellant.
Avrum Levicoff, Pittsburgh, for International Fidelity, appellee.
In this suretyship action, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, Eastern Steel Constructors, Inc. ("Eastern" or "Claimant"), and Appellee/Cross-Appellant, International Fidelity Insurance Company ("IFIC"), appeal and cross-appeal, respectively, from the July 23, 2020 judgment entered in the Court of Common Pleas of Centre County ("trial court"). Following the prime contractor Ionadi Corporation's ("Ionadi") failure to pay Eastern for work Eastern performed under a subcontract, Eastern sought to recover the outstanding payments from IFIC, Ionadi's surety. Eastern secured an arbitration award against Ionadi that was subsequently confirmed and reduced to a judgment. Thereafter, Eastern unsuccessfully attempted to collect the judgment from IFIC. Eastern filed suit and the case eventually proceeded to a jury trial, at the conclusion of which the jury returned a verdict in favor of Eastern and against IFIC. We now are called upon to decide, inter alia , whether a surety, who had notice of and an opportunity to participate in arbitration proceedings against its principal, is bound by an arbitration award rendered against the principal and, separately, whether a surety is subject to the bad faith statute, 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 8731. After careful review, we have concluded, inter alia , that IFIC, as surety, was bound by the arbitration award, but not subject to a bad faith action under Section 8731. Accordingly, we affirm in part, reverse in part, vacate in part, and remand for further proceedings.
In 2008, the Pennsylvania State University ("PSU") entered into a prime contract (the "Construction Contract") with Ionadi for the erection of steel on a project for the construction of the Millennium Science Center Complex at PSU's University Park Campus in Centre County, Pennsylvania (the "Project").
On October 29, 2008, IFIC issued a $10,125,000.00 payment bond ("Payment Bond") for Ionadi in connection with the Project.1 To do so, IFIC utilized The American Institute of Architects ("AIA") standard form AIA Document A312, which the parties modified to suit their needs. In particular, the Payment Bond provided:
Payment Bond, 10/29/08, at 5-6 (emphasis added).
On November 11, 2008, Ionadi subcontracted (the "Subcontract") with Eastern, a family-owned commercial subcontractor, for installation services relative to the steel reinforcing material. Specifically, Eastern agreed to, among other things, "supply labor and trade hand tools for installation of prefabricated reinforcing steel." Subcontract, 11/11/08, at ¶ 1. For the reinforcing steel installation, the Subcontract set the unit price of structure rebar at $0.33/per pound. Id. The Subcontract also provided in pertinent part:
Id. at ¶¶ 18-19, 21, 23, and 25 (emphasis added).
Thereafter, on November 25, 2008, Eastern separately entered into a written agreement with Tinney Rebar Services, Inc. ("Tinney"), a reinforcing supplier, for the fabrication and supply of the reinforcing steel for the Project. The Tinney agreement also contained an AAA arbitration provision.
On February 28, 2009, pursuant to the Subcontract, Eastern began handling and installing reinforcing steel, supplied to Ionadi by Tinney, at the Project. Eastern concluded its work at the Project on September 4, 2010. Eastern submitted requests for payment to Ionadi monthly by completing an AIA Application and Certification for Payment ("Payment Requests"). Each of the Payment Requests submitted by Eastern to Ionadi contained an invoice number, identified the amount of work performed within the covered time period, and listed the weight of reinforcing steel, among other things.
Ionadi paid Eastern on the first five Payment Requests for work performed at the Project through June 30, 2009. Thereafter, however, Ionadi either failed to pay the Payment Requests at all, or paid them only partially and late, citing cash flow problems.
On April 27, 2010, while work at the Project was ongoing, Eastern notified IFIC in writing of a claim under the Payment Bond for nonpayment of $622,182.90 by Ionadi. Eastern stated:
[Ionadi] is in default of payments due and owing to [Eastern], which Eastern is demanding payment by you as the surety co-obligor[.] ... [Ionadi] has admitted they have received payments that should have been forwarded to Eastern, however, due to their financial problems they have not. [Eastern] demand[s] prompt payment plus legal and statutory interest paid to Eastern.
Letter, 4/27/10. On April 29, 2010, IFIC notified Eastern that IFIC did not have sufficient information to determine whether all or any portion of the alleged amounts due was undisputed or disputed...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Bukowski v. Heim
...prejudice, bias, or ill-will, or such lack of support so as to be clearly erroneous." E. Steel Constructors, Inc. v. Int'l Fid. Ins. Co., 282 A.3d 827, 844 (Pa.Super. 2022) (cleaned up). Further, "to constitute reversible error, an evidentiary ruling must not only be erroneous, but also har......
-
Robson & Robson P.C. v. Patel
... ... Eastern Steel Constructors, Inc. v. Int'l Fid. Ins ... ...