From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Felix Contracting Corporation v. Fed. Ins. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 31, 1983
97 A.D.2d 533 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)

Opinion

October 31, 1983


In an action on a payment bond for the benefit of claimants supplying labor and materials, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Jiudice, J.), dated November 16, 1982, which granted defendants' motion for an order dismissing the complaint. Order affirmed, with costs. Plaintiff alleges that it suffered damages arising out of its entry into two subcontracts with John T. Brady Company (Brady) to perform demolition and construction work in connection with a general contract that Brady had previously entered into with the City of Stamford, Connecticut, whereby Brady undertook to construct a regional shopping center and garage. On or about December 18, 1978, Brady, as principal, and defendants, as sureties, executed a payment bond naming the City of Stamford Urban Redevelopment Commission and Rich-Taubman Associates as obligees. The bond states that it is "furnished pursuant to Section 49-41 of the General Statutes of Connecticut, Revision of 1958". Plaintiff commenced the instant action in the Supreme Court, Westchester County. In lieu of answering, defendants moved pursuant to CPLR 3211 to dismiss the complaint. Defendants argued that plaintiff did not comply with section 49-42 of the General Statutes of Connecticut which limits all actions on the bond to the judicial district where the contract is to be performed and requires that all such actions be brought within one year after labor and material were last supplied. Special Term granted the motion. We affirm. As the bond was issued pursuant to the requirements of the Connecticut statute and the Connecticut courts have held that the provisions of the statute must be read into the bond ( International Harvester Co. v De Felice Son, 151 Conn. 325; American Masons' Supply Co. v Brown Co., 174 Conn. 219), the action on the bond must be brought in the judicial district where the contract is to be performed ( Graybar Elec. Co. v New Amsterdam Cas. Co., 292 N.Y. 246; Omega N.Y. Prods. Corp. v Parisi Bros., 57 Misc.2d 1000). We have considered defendants' other contentions and find them to be lacking in merit. Lazer, J.P., Gibbons, Weinstein and Boyers, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Felix Contracting Corporation v. Fed. Ins. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 31, 1983
97 A.D.2d 533 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)
Case details for

Felix Contracting Corporation v. Fed. Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:FELIX CONTRACTING CORPORATION, Appellant, v. FEDERAL INSURANCE CO. et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Oct 31, 1983

Citations

97 A.D.2d 533 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)