Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Construction Bond topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Judge continues Westbin Mutual v. Fletcher Excavation dispute over bond payment and limitation argument
Summary
Parties in Westbin Mutual v. Fletcher Excavation debated whether the insurer paid a supplier claim after the claimant’s time to perfect a mechanics’ lien had expired; the court allowed the insurer and contractor time to exchange records and continued the matter to April 23 for further briefing and possible summary‑judgment consideration.
A civil hearing in circuit court over an insurance‑bond repayment dispute was continued after defense counsel raised a limitations‑period argument that the court said it had not previously considered.
Fletcher counsel argued Westbin Mutual paid a supplier’s claim after the supplier’s ability to perfect a mechanics’ lien had lapsed, and that the performance bond itself contains claim‑limitation language that may eliminate Westbin’s obligation. Westbin’s counsel said the insurer engaged in extended exchanges with the claimant and that the company believed payment was appropriate; Westbin otherwise sought time to produce ledgers and payment documentation the court had requested.
The judge directed the parties to exchange the requested records and return on April 23; he said he would review the bond language and briefs to determine whether summary judgment is appropriate or whether factual proof must be taken. The court flagged the legal issue it will examine as (a) the timing of the subcontractor’s claim to the surety and (b) whether the bond’s internal limitations period barred later payment to a claimant whose lien‑filing period had expired.
Both sides said they would provide additional documents and prefatory briefs; the judge allowed a continuance to give counsel time to put the relevant bond, invoice and ledger records in the court file.
