501 F. App'x 929
11th Cir.2012Background
- Hartford sues for declaratory relief on Area 7 surety liability in a project funded by federal appropriation.
- Area 3 contract between Marathon and Intrastate required 100% bonding; Hartford bonded Area 3.
- Area 7 Change Order purportedly expanded Area 3, transferring scope and cost.
- Hartford consented to Area 7 bond coverage, later retracting it; Intrastate relied on consent.
- Marathon terminated Intrastate for cause, allegedly due to lack of 100% bonding for Area 7.
- District court granted Hartford summary judgment on declaratory relief and Marathon’s counterclaim; court evaluated mootness and bonding issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is Hartford's Area 7 declaratory judgment moot? | Hartford. | Marathon/Intrastate. | Yes; claim mooted; remanded to dismiss. |
| Did Marathon terminate Intrastate for cause? | Hartford. | Marathon. | Yes; Intrastate breached 100% bonding obligation, giving cause. |
| Is Hartford liable on the Area 3 bond after termination for cause? | Hartford remained bound. | Termination negated obligation. | Hartford remained bound; liability for Area 3 bond persists. |
Key Cases Cited
- National Advertising Co. v. City of Miami, 402 F.3d 1329 (11th Cir. 2005) (mootness; jurisdictional inquiry for declaratory judgments)
- Emory v. Peeler, 756 F.2d 1547 (11th Cir. 1985) (continuing controversy required for jurisdiction)
- Zinni v. ER Solutions, Inc., 692 F.3d 1162 (11th Cir. 2012) (live controversy and mootness considerations)
- Christian Coalition of Fla., Inc. v. United States, 662 F.3d 1182 (11th Cir. 2011) (live controversy requirement under Article III)
- Preiser v. Newkirk, 422 U.S. 395 (U.S. 1975) (necessity of actual case or controversy)