Claimant v. Surety
Sedgwick successfully defended our surety client against a federal payment bond claimant’s effort to reduce to judgment an arbitration award obtained against the surety’s bond principal. Sedgwick took the position that portions of the arbitration award, which followed state law, were not recoverable against our client’s federal payment bond. Through our guidance, the client paid the "undisputed" portion of the underlying arbitration award, tried to negotiate a resolution of the difference, and eventually issued a statutory offer of compromise for a small amount. After considering the parties’ moving and opposing papers on the claimant’s motion to reduce the award to a judgment, the court found in our client’s favor on a majority of arguments regarding whether federal or state law applied. The court awarded an extremely small amount against our client in addition to what it had already paid to the claimant. Indeed, the additional amount was even less than our client’s statutory offer of compromise.