Firestone Financial LLC v. Meyer

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in action seeking to collect on defaulted loans that defendant had personally guaranteed. While defendant argued that plaintiff was estopped from bringing instant lawsuit because officer of plaintiff reneged on promise that plaintiff would set up $500,000 line of credit for defendant’s company and, until said line of credit was established, would finance any equipment purchase based on same terms as two prior loans that plaintiff had provided, defendant could not show that plaintiff’s officer made unambiguous promise of unlimited funding on same terms as prior loans, where prior loans had different interest rates and maturity dates. Moreover, plaintiff’s claim that officer orally promised unlimited funding until $500,000 line of credit was established was unbelievable because it did not make financial sense, and defendant otherwise failed to present any documentary evidence to support his claim that plaintiff’s failed promise of unlimited financing caused him to incur several million dollars in losses.