does not follow through and terminate a subcontract following a declaration of default may elect to use form A312, which unlike form A311, expressly conditions a surety’s performance obligations on the termination of the subcontractor’s right to complete the contract. ABA, Bond Default Manual 185 (Ex. 5.4, ¶ 12.3) (Richard H. Wisner ed., 1987). ¶53 The L&A court is also incorrect in stating that a “clear rule” is necessary to save a surety from tort liability for interference with the principal’s business relationship. There is no basis for the court’s statement. Once a surety has notice of a potential claim, it is privileged to intervene and protect its interests without liability for tortious interference. Gerstner Elec., Inc. v. Am. Ins. Co., 520 F.2d 790, 794-95 (8th Cir. 1975) (<HOLDING>); Zoby v. Am. Fid. Co., 242 F.2d 76, 79 (4th
holding that a surety after becoming aware of a single claim for labor and materials by a subcontractor acted reasonably by directing the owner to withhold further payments from the contractor even though contractor had not been declared in default by the owner holding that the owner could maintain a 93a claim against the subcontractor where there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the owner was the thirdparty beneficiary of the contract between the general contractor and the subcontractor holding that where owner and contractor frequently discussed progress of construction project and advancement of money by owner to contractor and contractor misappropriated some of the money debt was not excepted from discharge under bankruptcy code  523a2 because owner did not show that contractor had intent not to perform when the agreement was made holding that a provision making all payments to subcontractor by  contractor expressly contingent upon payment for the work by contractor from owner is a payifpaid clause under texas law holding that where contract between contractor and subcontractor allowed subcontractor to recover if contractor recovered contractor was not barred from bringing suit on behalf of subcontractor