Dabbs v. Key Equipment Finance, Inc., 303 Ga. App. 570

Summary

The Georgia Court of Appeals held that Pamela Dabbs's guaranty was unenforceable under the statute of frauds because it did not identify the debt, principal debtor, or promisee. The court rejected the argument that one of several contemporaneous leases could supply the missing information because parol evidence was required to connect that lease to the guaranty. The court reversed the grant of summary judgment to Key Equipment and directed that summary judgment be granted to Dabbs.

Holdings

1. The guaranty was unenforceable because it failed to identify the debt, the principal debtor, and the promisee, as required for a promise to answer for another's debt.
2. The lease could not be construed with the guaranty to supply the missing terms because Key Equipment could not establish from the writings themselves that the guaranty and Lease No. 1 were executed in the course of the same transaction.
3. Parol evidence could not be used to establish which of several leases the guaranty secured or to supply the missing connection between the writings in this statute-of-frauds case.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the separate guaranty satisfied the statute of frauds when it failed to identify the debt, principal debtor, and promisee.
2. Whether contemporaneous lease documents could be construed with the guaranty to supply the missing essential terms.
3. Whether parol evidence could establish that the guaranty and Lease No. 1 were executed in the course of the same transaction when multiple similar leases existed.

Disposition

reversed