MIAMI NATIONAL BANK, APPELLANT,
v.
FIRST INTERNATIONAL REALTY INVESTMENT CORPORATION ET AL., APPELLEES
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.
Miami National Bank appealed a summary judgment in favor of personal guarantor C.D. Porch, Jr. on a promissory note. The court affirmed the trial court's decision, finding that Porch validly revoked his personal guarantee before the note in question was executed, and that the Bank was aware of this revocation.
The court affirmed the summary judgment for Porch, holding that Porch validly revoked his personal guarantee and that the undisputed facts established he was entitled to prevail. The Bank's knowledge of the revocation and removal of Porch's name from the guarantor list barred the Bank from enforcing the guarantee on the later note.
[1] A guarantor may revoke a personal guarantee on a promissory note by providing timely notice to the lender.
[2] A lender's knowledge of a guarantor's revocation of a personal guarantee precludes enforcement of the guarantee against that individual.
Previewing 2 of 3 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 record supports the finding of the trial court as to the fact that Porch communicated the revocation of his personal guarantee to the Bank which subsequently removed his name from the list of personal guarantors.”
Establishes the undisputed factual basis for Porch's entitlement to prevail on the revocation claim.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn March 1974, First International Realty Investment Corporation borrowed $50,000 from Miami National Bank on a 90-day promissory note personally guar…
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 Notice Of Revocation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff, Miami National Bank, appeals an adverse final summary judgment in favor of C. D. Porch, Jr., a personal guarantor on a promissory note.
In March, 1974 First International Realty Investment Corporation borrowed $50,000 from Miami National Bank and executed a 90-day promissory note which was personally guaranteed by the defendant, C.
E. Porch, Jr., and two other individuals. Although the loan commitment was for a one-year period, the transaction was so structured that the promissory note was renewable every 90 days in order that the Bank could review the financial condition of the borrower, First International Realty, and the guarantors. After execution of the first 90-day note in March, additional 90-day renewal notes were subsequently executed and accepted by the Bank in June, September and on December 2.
However, prior to the execution and acceptance of the September, 1974 renewal note, defendant Porch notified the Bank both orally and in writing that he was revoking his personal guarantee on the note. Again, on December 7, 1974 upon being contacted by the Bank for an update on his financial status, Porch responded in writing that in the previous June he had notified the Bank of the revocation of his guarantee. Subsequently, First International Realty defaulted on this December 2 note and the Bank filed the instant suit against First International and joined Porch on his March, 1974 guarantee and the other two guarantors. Porch defended on the ground that he had revoked his personal guarantee. The Bank contended to the contrary, or in the alternative that it was not made aware of any such revocation. Following pretrial discovery both parties filed motions for summary judgment and after hearing the trial court entered summary judgment for Porch.
We affirm.
The record supports the finding of the trial court as to the fact that Porch communicated the revocation of his personal guarantee to the Bank which subsequently removed his name from the list of personal guarantors. There being no question that Porch was entitled to prevail under the undisputed facts, the summary judgment is affirmed. See e. g. Goodwin v. Shire, 105 So. 2d 178 (Fla.3d DCA 1958).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The Hemisphere Nat'l Bank v. Goudie, 504 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…at Goudie was no longer an obli-gor under the note either as a principal of Fergo, Inc. or as a guarantor. The entry of summary judgment on these points was, therefore, correct and must be affirmed. Miami Nat’l Bank v. First Int’l Realty Inv. Corp., 364 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 376 So. 2d 74 (Fla.1979). Hemisphere argued, alternatively, before the trial court and here, that Goudie was liable as an endorser of the note. That claim, however, was not included in the pleadings, and under Flo…
-
Wiskeman v. First Bank OF Hollywood Beach, 405 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…ed Wiske-man’s appropriate affirmative defenses that he was not liable on his personal guaranty of a corporation’s loan obligation because (a) he had revoked the guaranty, see Miami National Bank v. First International Realty Investment Corporation, 364 So. 2d 873 (Fla.3d DCA 1978); and (b) the bank had abandoned its reliance on the guaranty, see Burt v. Community National Bank of Bal Harbour, 142 So. 2d 118 (Fla.3d DCA 1962), and raised issues of material fact precluding summary judgment for the bank, Johnso…
-
Miami Nat'l Bank v. Nunez, 541 So. 2d 1259 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…ss for which it sought payment; the bank’s knowledge that Mrs. Nunez had revoked her guaranty of her husband’s personal indebtedness; and the bank’s cognizance of the legal effect of that revocation. See Miami Nat’l Bank v. First Int’l Realty Corp., 364 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 376 So. 2d 74 (Fla.1979). The compensatory damages awarded to Mrs. Nunez were composed of: first, the compensation due her for the mental suffering she incurred as a result of the bank’s malicious prosecution of he…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Goodwin v. Shire, 105 So. 2d 178 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958)