Court finds that suretywas entitled to summary judgment on its claims against principal for breach of indemnity agreement because impossibility of performing the undelrying construction contract did not make compliance with the indemnity agreement impossible. Further, the fact that damages were caused by third parties did not allow the principal to avoid its obligations. Finally, the prinicpal's argument that the surety paid too much under the bonds did not survive scrutiny under the terms of the agreement.
Reviewing the Case Document is for members only. Please login