JOSEPH KODEL, APPELLANT,
v.
BEACON LEASING CORPORATION, A FLORIDA 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.
The court reversed summary judgment against a guarantor because the record failed to establish the amount of principal indebtedness or that plaintiff was an assignee of the guaranty, despite the guaranty agreement's language permitting assignment.
Summary judgment against a guarantor must be reversed when the record fails to disclose the principal indebtedness amount or proof that plaintiff is an assignee of the guaranty.
[1] A guaranty agreement containing language that it shall inure to the benefit of the creditor's successors and assigns is assignable, but enforcement by an assignee require…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“The obligation of the guarantors hereunder shall be several and also joint, each with all or with any one or more of the others, and may be enforced against each separately or against any two or more jointly, or against some separately and some jointly, and shall inure to the benefit of said Bank, its successors, legal representatives and assigns.”
The court quoted the guaranty agreement to establish that guaranties are assignable and enforceable by assignees.
Kodel guaranteed debts of another party, and Beacon Leasing Corporation sought to enforce the guaranty through summary judgment.…
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 Successors And Assigns cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We reverse a summary judgment entered against a guarantor of debts of another because the record fails to disclose the amount of the principal indebtedness due or that the plaintiff was an assignee of the defendant Kodel’s guaranty. Bee and compare Alderman Interior Systems, Inc. v. First National-Heller Factors, Inc., 376 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979); Lea Industries, Inc. v. Raelyn International, Inc., 363 So. 2d 49 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); 38 Am.Jur.2d, Guaranty § 123.
We find no merit in the appellant’s contention that the guaranty could not be assigned and that it was, in fact, a limited guaranty. The guaranty agreement reads in part as follows:
The obligation of the guarantors hereunder shall be several and also joint, each with all or with any one or more of the others, and may be enforced against each separately or against any two or more jointly, or against some separately and some jointly, and shall inure to the benefit of said Bank, its successors, legal representatives and assigns.
If in fact the plaintiff has a valid assignment of the guaranty and there is a debt due, it may recover thereon.
No merit is also found in the defendant’s contention that he validly cancelled the guaranty.
This reversal is without prejudice to either party renewing motions for summary judgments upon additional discovery or affidavits.
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jabba v. The Cadle Co., 623 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Brunswick Corp. v. Creel, 471 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Kodel v. Beacon Leasing Corp., 422 So. 2d 90 (Fla.3d DCA 1982).…
Authorities Cited
- LEA Indus., Inc. v. Raelyn Int'l, Inc., 363 So. 2d 49 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- Alderman Interior Sys., Inc. v. First National-Heller Factors, Inc., 376 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)
- Sch. Bd. OF Polk Cnty. v. Bane Cheek, 376 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)