Home Furnishings, Inc., George C. Burnett, Jr., and Marie E. Burnett v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA

Summary

This dissenting opinion addresses a lender's suit against guarantors for a deficiency under a promissory note after foreclosure and liquidation of collateral. The dissent concludes that the lender failed to conclusively establish the amount owed because a fact issue existed regarding whether the guarantors received credit for all seized collateral. It would reverse the summary judgment and remand for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. In the dissent's view, Chase failed to conclusively prove the amount of the deficiency because its summary-judgment evidence did not establish that credit had been given for all collateral seized.
2. In the dissent's view, the guaranty waivers did not relieve Chase of its obligation to account for collateral it seized after choosing to foreclose on that collateral.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Chase conclusively proved the amount due and owing for purposes of summary judgment on its deficiency claim against the guarantors.
2. Whether the guarantors' affidavit raised a genuine issue of material fact concerning credits for collateral allegedly seized by Chase but not accounted for.
3. Whether contractual waivers in the guaranties eliminated the guarantors' right to contest Chase's accounting for collateral after Chase elected to foreclose on it.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded