CONTRACTOR'S BOND FOR PUBLIC BUILDINGS OR WORKS
Act 213 of 1963
129.201 Bonds of principal contractor on public building, work, or improvement; irrevocable letter of credit.
Sec. 1.
Before any contract, exceeding $50,000.00 for the construction, alteration, or repair of any public building or public work or improvement of the state or a county, city, village, township, school district, public educational institution, other political subdivision, public authority, or public agency hereinafter referred to as the "governmental unit", is awarded, the proposed contractor, hereinafter referred to as the "principal contractor", shall furnish at his or her own cost to the governmental unit a performance bond and a payment bond which shall become binding upon the award of the contract to the principal contractor. However, if the principal contractor is a common carrier as defined in section 3 of Act No. 300 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended, being section 462.3 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, or the designated operator of a state subsidized railroad, the principal contractor may provide an irrevocable letter of credit from a state or national bank or a state or federally chartered savings and loan association instead of the bonds. Neither the invitation for bids, nor any person acting, or purporting to act, on behalf of the governmental unit shall require that the bonds be furnished by a particular bank or surety company, or through a particular agent or broker, or through a bank, company, agent, or broker in any particular locality.
History: 1963, Act 213, Eff. Sept. 6, 1963 ;-- Am. 1972, Act 351, Imd. Eff. Jan. 9, 1973 ;-- Am. 1982, Act 11, Imd. Eff. Feb. 17, 1982
Notes of Decisions
Wyandotte Elec. Supply Co. v. Elec. Tech. Sys., Inc., 881 N.W.2d 95 (Mich. 2016).
· cites it 13× “Westfield provided a surety bond for the project in accordance with the public works bond act (PWBA), MCL 129.201 et seq. KEO subcontracted with ETS to provide labor and materials for the project, and ETS, in turn, subcontracted with Wyandotte for materials.”
Kammer Asphalt Paving Co. v. East China Twp. Schs., 504 N.W.2d 635 (Mich. 1993).
· cites it 18× “imposes upon a governmental unit [1] the duty to verify the validity of a payment bond furnished by a general contractor of a public works project, we reverse the Court of Appeals affirmance of summary disposition with regard to plaintiff's negligence count.”
WT ANDREW Co. v. Mid-State Sur. Corp., 545 N.W.2d 351 (Mich. 1996).
· cites it 17× “In this case, we are called upon to determine if a sub-subcontractor is entitled to relief under the public works bond statute, MCL 129.201 et seq.; MSA 5.2321(1) et seq.”
Morris Pumps v. Centerline Piping, Inc., 729 N.W.2d 898 (Mich. Ct. App. 2007).
“As required under its general contract and the public works bonding act (PWBA), MCL 129.201 et seq., defendant furnished performance and payment bonds for the construction project.”
Sau-Tuk Indus., Inc. v. Allegan Cnty., 892 N.W.2d 33 (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).
“We agree with the reasoning of this Court in Saginaw Landlords Ass’n, unpub op at 4, that to accept Sau-Tuk’s argument would render nugatory the clear and unambiguous language of MCL 141.121(3) and Holland City Code, § 9-6.”
Northline Excavating, Inc. v. Livingston Cnty., 839 N.W.2d 693 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 2× “In order to comply with MCL 129.201, which requires a contractor to provide a performance bond for public-sector contracts exceeding $50,000, Northline and Hanover executed a performance bond.”
McCoig Materials, LLC v. Galui Constr., Inc., 818 N.W.2d 410 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012).
“The mere fact that Galui Construction had separate contracts with Warren and Center Line for the projects does not transform plaintiffs delivery of materials under one contract to defendant Galui Construction into separate contracts with defendant Galui Construction. Indeed, the…”
Royalite Co. v. Fed. Ins., 457 N.W.2d 96 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 6× “As required by the Michigan public works bond act, MCL 129.201 et seq.; MSA 5.2321(1) et seq.”
Square D. Env't Corp. v. Aero Mech., Inc., 326 N.W.2d 629 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982).
· cites it 4× “The trial court concluded that strict compliance was necessary and, therefore, granted a motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's claim against the payment bond.”
ABC Supply Co. v. City of River Rouge, 216 Mich. App. 396 (Mich. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 4× “On appeal, plaintiff asserts that the lower court erred in finding that MCL 129.201; MSA 5.2321(1) does not provide a cause of action for a supplier injured by a governmental unit’s failure to require a payment bond as described in the statute.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.