GEORGE T. WATSON, APPELLANT,
v.
THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF CHICAGO, AN ILLINOIS CORPORATION, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
George Watson, as guarantor of a corporate debt, appealed a judgment against him on a guaranty agreement, arguing that Illinois law should have been pleaded and proven as the contracts were executed in Illinois. The court affirmed, holding that parties are free to plead foreign law, and absent such pleading, foreign law is presumed identical to the forum state's law.
The court held that either party is free to plead and prove applicable foreign law, and upon failure to plead such law, it is presumed that the foreign law is the same as the forum state's law. Therefore, the bank was not required to plead and prove Illinois law.
[1] When foreign law is not pleaded or proven in a Florida court, it is presumed to be the same as Florida law.
[2] A party seeking to recover on a guaranty agreement must plead and prove the amount due and owing.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Either party to this litigation was free to plead and prove the law which was applicable to the contracts in question. Upon the failure to plead any applicable foreign law, it is presumed that any such law is the same as Florida law.”
Establishes the governing rule that foreign law need not be pleaded and proven; absent such pleading, foreign law is presumed identical to forum law.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe First National Bank of Chicago extended credit to Kuch and Watson, Inc., in consideration for Watson's execution of a guaranty agreement guarantee…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Application Of Foreign Law cases and more on FLexlaw
DOWNEY, Chief Judge.
In consideration for the appellee’s, The First National Bank of Chicago, extending credit to Kuch and Watson, Inc., an Illinois corporation, appellant, George T. Watson, executed a guaranty agreement guaranteeing repayment of any sums due from Kuch and Watson, Inc., to appellee. When Kuch and Watson, Inc., failed to pay the sum of $28,116.62 due the Bank appellee filed suit on the guaranty agreement.
Appellee’s complaint simply alleged the extension of credit in consideration of the guaranty agreement and that $28,116.62 was due and owing thereon and that the principal debtor, Kuch and Watson, Inc., had failed to make payment. Appellant filed an answer generally denying the allegations of the complaint and affirmatively alleging that no interest was due. After a non-jury trial the trial court entered judgment for the appellee for $28,116.62, plus costs of $137.00. No interest was provided for in said judgment.
Appellant contends the trial court erred because the guaranty agreement and promissory note sued upon were Illinois contracts and their validity and interpretation was governed by the law of Illinois. Therefore, appellant contends appellee was required to plead and prove the law of Illinois and having failed to do so appellee cannot recover. We believe appellant’s argument is unsound. Either party to this litigation was free to plead and prove the law which was applicable to the contracts in question. Upon the failure to plead any applicable foreign law, it is presumed that any such law is the same as Florida law. Kingston v. Quimby, 80 So. 2d 455 (Fla.1955); Movielab, Inc. v. Davis, 217 So. 2d 890 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1969).
Appellee has cross appealed the failure of the trial court to grant appellee interest in the final judgment. Resort to the record reflects that the note in question provided for interest to be paid, but the rate thereof was left blank. Appellant successfully objected to any proof by appellee relating to the rate of interest applicable to this note. Our review of the testimony which appellee sought to adduce to prove its entitlement to interest convinces us that the trial court was correct in sustaining appellant’s objections thereto. In many instances the testimony was either not relevant or the witness was not competent to prove the issues. Thus, we find no merit in appellee’s cross appeal.
The judgment appealed from is affirmed.
ANSTEAD and LETTS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wood v. Whittaker Corp., 519 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Pait v. Ford Motor Co., 515 So. 2d 1278 (Fla.1987); Melendez v. Dreis & Krump Mfg. Co., 515 So. 2d 735 (Fla.1987); Coffman Realty, Inc. v. Tosohatchee Game Preserve, Inc., 413 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1982); Watson v. First Nat’l Bank, 367 So. 2d 732 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); Willis v. L. W. Foster Sportswear Co., 352 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977); Movielab, Inc. v. Davis, 217 So. 2d 890 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969).…
Authorities Cited
- Kingston v. Quimby, 80 So. 2d 455 (Fla. 1955)
- Movielab, Inc. v. Davis, 217 So. 2d 890 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)