MICHAEL S. PERAGINE
v.
PLATINUM RAPID FUNDING GROUP, LTD.
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.
A guarantor who fails to present evidentiary proof that he did not consent to a modification of the guaranteed obligation cannot resist liability based on that modification.
[1] A guarantor who fails to submit evidentiary proof demonstrating lack of consent to a modification of the guaranteed obligation cannot establish a valid defense to liabili…
[2] When a party's factual version is blatantly contradicted by the record such that no reasonable jury could believe it, the trial court may rely on the contradicted version…
Previewing 2 of 2 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 defendant cannot resist liability upon the ground that the time within which to pay the liability guaranteed has been extended by the taking of the new note. That extension was with the full consent of the sureties, and was in fact negotiated by the defendant McNaught, who is now defending.”
Cited from Spier v. McNaught to support the principle that a guarantor consenting to modification of a guaranteed obligation cannot later avoid liability based on that modification.
Michael Peragine appealed a circuit court judgment involving a guarantee of an obligation to Platinum Rapid Funding Group and others. The parties disp…
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 Guarantor Liability cases and more on FLexlaw
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Scott Kerner, Judge; L.T. Case No. 50-2022-CA-010326- XXXX-MB.
Edward A. Buchanan of Custos Law, Jupiter, for appellant. Eric M. Levine of Atlas│Solomon, PLLC, Stuart, for appellees Peter and Julie Lagasse.
PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Arlona Ltd. P’ship v. The 8th of January Corp., 857 N.Y.S.2d 208 (App. Div. 2008) (affirming where guarantor “failed to make a prima facie showing, through the submission of evidentiary proof, that she did not consent to the modification of the lease in her individual capacity”); Spier v. McNaught, 105 N.Y.S. 1060, 1061 (App. Div. 1907) (“The defendant cannot resist liability upon the ground that the time within which to pay the liability guaranteed has been extended by the taking of the new note. That extension was with the full consent of the sureties, and was in fact negotiated by the defendant McNaught, who is now defending.”); see also In re Amends. to Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510, 317 So. 3d 72, 75-76 (Fla. 2021) (“[W]hen opposing parties tell two different stories, one of which is blatantly contradicted by the record, so that no reasonable jury could believe it, a court should not adopt that version of the facts for purposes of ruling on a motion for summary judgment.” (quoting Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372, 380 (2007))). GROSS, CIKLIN and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.
2
* * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (U.S. 2007)
- In re Amendments to Fla. Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510, 317 So. 3d 72 (Fla. 2021)