Opinion
FBTCV166055720S
09-28-2016
People's United Bank, N.A. v. Brian Patterson
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Edward T. Krumeich, J.
Plaintiff People's United Bank (" People's") has moved for summary judgment to enforce the commercial guaranty (" the Guaranty") of defendant Brian Patterson (" Patterson") after default on the underlying loan to NEOS-IT, LLC (" Borrower"), which had signed a promissory note in connection with a loan of $100,000 (" the Note"). For the reasons stated below, the motion is granted.
The Standards for Deciding a Motion for Summary Judgment
" 'The standards . . . [for] review of a . . . motion for summary judgment are well established. Practice Book [§ 17-49] provides that summary judgment shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, affidavits and any other proof submitted show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law . . . In deciding a motion for summary judgment, the trial court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party . . . The party seeking summary judgment has the burden of showing the absence of any genuine issue [of] material facts which, under applicable principles of substantive law, entitle him to a judgment as a matter of law . . . and the party opposing such a motion must provide an **957 evidentiary foundation to demonstrate the existence of a genuine issue of material fact . . . A material fact . . . [is] a fact which will make a difference in the result of the case . . ." (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) DiPietro v. Farmington Sports Arena, LLC, 306 Conn. 107, 115-16, 49 A.3d 951 (2012), quoting H.O.R.S.E. of Connecticut, Inc. v. Washington, 258 Conn. 553, 558-60, 783 A.2d 993 (2001).
There is no Genuine Issue of Material Fact that the Debt is Owing and the Guaranty May be Enforced.
People's submitted an affidavit of James A. McGuire, Vice President of People's, with copies of the Note, Guaranty and Payoff attached, that establishes that People's is the holder and owner of the Note and Guaranty, the loan is in default, due demand for payment has been made, no payments were made and there is an outstanding balance due of $104,527.75 as of August 12, 2016, with interest accruing at the per diem rate of $15.97. Patterson guarantied absolutely and unconditionally to pay the above to People's along with collection costs and attorneys fees. Patterson appeared in the action and answered admitting execution of the Note and Guaranty, but denying that there was a debt due. No affidavit or other evidentiary proof has been offered to rebut People's claims.
Summary judgment may be granted where, as here, there is no genuine issue of material fact about the underlying debt, the default and demand, the enforceability of the Note and Guaranty. In order to establish a prima facie claim for breach of a written guaranty plaintiff must prove: (1) plaintiff is owed a debt from a third party, (2) defendant guarantied payment of the debt and (3) the debt has not been paid. See Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. v. Harris, 899 F.Supp. 64, 67 (D.Conn. 1995). All those elements are met here.
Summary Judgment is granted in favor of People's as against Patterson in the amount of $105,278.34, which is the sum of principal and interest plus late charges set forth in the affidavit and interest of $750.59 from said date to the date hereof, together with costs and fees to be determined.