Skip to Navigation
The Collaborative Clearinghouse for Lawsuits and Other Claims Against ACE Group Insurance Companies

THE TRI-M GROUP, LLC v. OMEGA SERVICE MAINTENANCE CORPORATION et al

ATTENTION: It is possible that this information may no longer be current and therefore may be inaccurate. The index contains both open and closed cases and is not a complete list of cases in which an ACE Insurance Group company is involved. This information is provided to give interested persons an idea of the issues disputed in the indexed cases. For a full understanding of a case, one should read the rest of the court file, including the response. For the most up-to-date and complete information on a case, visit www.pacer.gov or contact the clerk of the relevant court.

Case Number: 
2:13-cv-04024 Search Pacer
ACE Group party(s): 
Opposing Party: 
THE TRI-M GROUP, LLC
Court Type: 
Federal
US District Court: 
Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Date Filed: 
Jul 11 2013

"First Claim
(Breach of Contract - Tri-M vs. Omega)

12. Tri-M repeats and realleges paragraph 1 through 1 1 above as though fully set forth in this claim.

13. Tri-M has performed all of its obligations under the Subcontract.

14, Omega has breached the Subcontract in that it has failed and refused to pay Tri-M in full for the labor, services, materials, and equipment furnished in the prosecution of the work provided for in the Prime Contract and pursuant to the Subcontract.
15. Tri-M has suffered damages as a direct and proximate result of Omega's breach of contract.

Second Claim
(Quantum Meruit - Tri-M vs. Omega)

16, Tri-M repeats and realleges paragraph 1 through 15 above as though fully set forth in this claim.

17. Tri-M provided valuable labor, services, materials and equipment that were necessary for Omega to perform and complete its obligations under the Prime Contract.

18. Omega benefitted from Tri-M's labor, services, materials and equipment, including but not limited to the fact that Omega could not have fully performed and completed its obligations under the Prime Contract in the absence of the labor, services, materials and equipment that Tri-M provided.

19. Omega has failed and refused to pay Tri-M for the labor, services, materials and equipment referenced herein.

20. Tri-M has suffered damages and Omega has been unjustly enriched as a result of Omega's failure to pay plaintiff for the labor, services, materials and equipment provided by Tri-

Third Claim
(Miller Act Payment Bond - Tri-M vs. Westchester)

21. Tri-M repeats and realleges paragraph 1 through 20 above as though fully set forth in this claim.

22. Westchester is obligated, pursuant to the Bond, to pay Tri-M for the labor, services, materials and equipment it furnished in the prosecution of the work provided for in the Prime Contract and Subcontract, and for which Omega failed to make payment.

23. Westchester has failed to fulfill its obligations under the Bond to pay plaintiff for labor, services, materials and equipment furnished in the prosecution of the work provided for in the Prime Contract and the Subcontract, and for which Omega failed to make payment."

The provided text is an excerpt from a document filed in this case. For a full understanding of the case, one should read the complete court file, including the response.

Javascript is required to view this map.