The United States Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals highlighted the critical importance of precise contractual designations, affirming a district court's ruling against “E&I” Global Energy Services, Inc. on a breach of contract claim against a surety.

E&I Global Energy Services, Inc. (E&I) and E&C Global, LLC (E&C), both owned by a single individual, were both eventually involved in a construction project in South Dakota for the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA). E & I served as a subcontractor on the project to the original general contractor. Following the owner’s termination of the original GC, the GC’s surety was tasked with finding a new completion contractor. The resulting tender agreement and completion contract named E&C, not E&I, as the completion contractor.

The court notes that E & I eventually served as the de facto completion contractor because “E&C could not obtain a bond required by the contract.”