Gulf Coast Motor

This melt includes a ch wholeenging Course roam due in Week 6. Because of this, you ordain need to spend additional sequence and effort throughout the course to endure on your project rather than waitress until Week 6. The subject of the project may be base on every crusade from all chapter as mansioned in this course. Examples are fount 10. 3- Montgomery v. slope on page 175 and Case 14. 2- Page v. disconnect microscope slide Motors on page 111. Choose the case you conjure to research and t herefore do the interest Read and deduct the case. Show your abridgment and debate and make it clear you understand the material.Be convinced(predicate) to use the concepts of the course to tell your reasoning. Summarize the situation. Dedicate at least(prenominal) one heading to separately following outline topic ? Parties Identify the plaintiff and the suspect and tell nearlything about them. Facts Summarize those facts critical to the final result of the case. Proce dure Who brought the appeal? What was the endpoint in the lower salute(s)? Issue Note the central headspring or headsprings on which the case turns. keeping How did the court fragment the issue(s)? Who won? Reasoning Explain the logic that supported the courts decision. Case Questions Be real to address and thoroughly get along each(prenominal) and every case question and each part of each question. Conclusion This should tot up the secernate aspects of the decision and also your recommendations on the courts ruling. Include citations on the slides and a cite page with your sources. Use APA style citations and references. Do signifi atomic number 50t research outside of the take and demonstrate that you demand in a very obvious way. This refers to research beyond the efficacious research. This involves something about the parties or early(a) interesting related area.Show something you have observed about the case, parties, or different alpha element from your own research. Be for certain this is obvious and adds value beyond the legal reasoning of the case. PAGE v. GULF edge MOTORS bloody shame R. PAGE v. GULF brink MOTORS. 2030401. December 30, 2004 David Vaughn, Daphne, for appellant. James Re chevronchak of Miller, Hamilton, Snider & Odom, L. L. C. , Mobile, for appellee. Parties Identify the plaintiff and the defendant and tell something about them. disjunction lantern slide Motors sued Glenn and bloody shame Page to recover nones lent at various quantify to Glenn. bloody shame maintain the affirmative defenses of the miss of consideration and the codified of Frauds. Facts Summarize those facts critical to the outcome of the case. On August 29, 2003, the case was well-tried by the court without a jury. ? The running play court perceive ore tenus testimony from bloody shame, Glenn, and representatives of disjuncture chute Motors. ? After the streamlet, the parties submitted briefs on the cover of the enactment of Frauds as to the claims asserted against Mary. On November 7, 2003, the rivulet court entered a judgment in the amount of $23,020 in favor of disconnection rim Motors and against both Glenn and Mary.On December 8, 2003, Mary filed a exploit to alter, amend, or vacate the judgment base on the regulation of Frauds. ? That motion was denied on December 9, 2003. ? On January 20, 2004, Mary filed a nonice of appeal to this court. ? Glenn did not appeal. Glenn had a long-term friendship with Jerry Sellers, one of the owners of Gulf border Motors. ? In or approximately 1993, Glenn began fasten oning points from Gulf Coast Motors on a recurring basis. ? The parties declare that Glenn borrowed money from Gulf Coast Motors and that he had a gambling problem, but in that respect is no evidence as to what Glenn apply the loan proceeds for. ? In its brief to this court, Gulf Coast Motors fails to cite to each evidence indicating that Mary derived an economic value from the p roceeds of any of the loans to Glenn. The loan branch was informal. ? Gulf Coast Motors set up a one-page daybook to al-Quran Glenns loans. ? The ledger sheet showed the debits and accredits, and it contained the following statement at the bottom, signed by Glenn ? I affiliate to counterbalance Jerry Sellers2 as above with expiry of all exemptions. ? Mary did not sign the ledger sheet, and her name does not face on that pointon.At various times between October 2000 and October 2002, Glenn borrowed money from Gulf Coast Motors. ? match to Gulf Coast Motorss bookkeeper, Glenn would come in and borrow money from Gulf Coast Motors and set up a fee plan, wreak cash, then sometimes hed come in and he would want Sellers to cash a cave in for him and, h out of date the check. ? At various times, Glenn do stomachments, typically in amounts of $300 or $600, to apply toward the balance of his pecker. ? The parties do not dispute that Glenn was indebted to Gulf Coast Motors. Sellers testified that he became concerned about Glenns debt in 2002 and that he asked Mary to warrant Glenns debt. ? According to Sellers, Mary agreed to make sure that Gulf Coast Motors was paid if they would figure out with us. ? Sellers testified as follows I called Mary on the telephone. ? Mary, Glenn is up here wanting me to cash other check and, you know, hes got a big bill already run up here and he tells me when yall harvest your timber ? youre going to fabricate off all this figure And, ah, Mary said, well, Im gonna net it. ? I foretell you that well cede this off. Just work with us until we can treat our timber. ? I cry you you wont digest a dime. ? Youll be paid comely as soon as we get the money. Sellers testified that he modified Glenns payment name and made additional advances based on Marys say-sos that she would make payment. ? Sellers testified She said, Well, if you will redo those only put them in a payment where we can pay five of sextette hund red dollars a month well do that until we sell our timber. ? And based on her look for that she would make sure it was paid, I did that for her because Glenn does not have anything in his name. ?And the only assurance I could go forward on was Miss Mary. And she promised me faithfully that I would be paid in full everything was owed and all she wanted me to do was work with them until they could sell their timber. Mary denied that she had promised to pay any of Glenns debt, and she denied that Sellers had asked her to pay Glenns debt. ? Mary testified that she never received any money from Sellers or Gulf Coast Motors, and she denied that she had received any economic gain ground from moneys lent by Gulf Coast Motors to Glenn. She testified that, if she had been asked, she would have advised Sellers not to add together money to Glenn. ?Because the trial court heard ore tenus evidence, the trial courts findings of fact are apt(p) a presumption of correctness, and we will not rev erse the trial courts judgment based on those findings of fact un slight it is clearly erroneous, without sustenance evidence, manifestly unjust, or against the great fish of the evidence. ? Odom v. Hull, 658 So. 2d 442, 444 (Ala. 1995). ? Where, however, the issue is the coating of justness to the facts, the presumption of correctness has no application and our review is de novo. Brown v. City of Huntsville, 891 So. 2d 295 (Ala. 2004) ? Ex parte Board of Zoning allowance of Mobile, 636 So. 2d 415 (Ala. 1994). Our disposition of this case turns on the proper application of the principle of Frauds. ? Specifically, ? 8-9-2, Ala. legislation 1975, provides, in pertinent part In the following cases, every apprehension is pervert un little such bargain or some note or memorandum thereof expressing the consideration is in writing and subscribe by the party to be supercharged therewith or some other person by him thereunto lawfully permit in writing ? (3)?Every spare promi se to answer for the debt, default or miscarriage of some other ? (7)? Every balance or commitment to lead money, holdup or forebear recompensement thereof or to modify the provisions of such an agreement or commitment neglect for consumer loans with a principal amount financed less than $25,000. Issue Who brought the appeal? What was the outcome in the lower court(s)? A promise to pay the debt of another is proscribe by the codified of Frauds unless it is in writing. ? It is not disputed that Mary did not sign a note, guaranty, or any other writing smart to pay any part of Glenns debts. Therefore, if the purported agreement to pay Glenns debt is in spite of appearance the Statute of Frauds, Mary is not liable even if the trial court found Sellerss testimony to be credible. ? Marys asseverate oral promises are not enforceable under the Statute of Frauds. Gulf Coast Motors makes three arguments in this appeal. ?First, it argues that Marys obligations were fender promise s to pay, rather than guaranty or related agreements, and thus were not within the Statute of Frauds. ? The Alabama supreme Court has specify original and collateral agreements as follows ? confirming agreements are those in which the object of the promise is to become the guarantor of anothers debt ? these are within the statute and must be in writing to be enforceable. ?Original agreements are those in which the effect of the promise is to pay the debt of another, but the object of the promise is to advertise some excogitation of the promisor. Fendley v. Dozier Hardware Co. , 449 So. 2d 1236, 1238 (Ala. 1984) (citations omitted). ? See also Lawler v. Cook oil color Co. , 640 So. 2d 950, 951 (Ala. Civ. App. 1994). In this case, Marys alleged agreement was to guaranty payment of Glenns debt. ? Much of the credit had already been extended to Glenn when Mary allegedly made her oral promises to guaranty payment. Moreover, there is no suggestion in the record as to any economic purpose that Mary would advance by getment of Glenns debt, and there is no evidence indicating that Mary received any economic clear from the loans to Glenn. ? See Lankford v. Rucker, 396 So. 2d 105 (Ala. Civ. App. 1981). ? We intermit that the issue presented involves an alleged guaranty, or collateral, agreement, not an original agreement. ?Second, Gulf Coast Motors argues that Ala.Code 1975, ? 8-9-2(7), exempts from its application agreements or commitments to lend money in cases of consumer loans with a principal amount financed less than $25,000. ? 8-9-2(7). ? This argument fails because ? 8-9-2(7) applies to commitments to lend money, not to repay money that has been borrowed. ? Carter v. Holland, 825 So. 2d 832, 836 (Ala. Civ. App. 2001). ? See Rozell v. Childers, 888 So. 2d 1244 (Ala. Civ. App. 2004). ? Marys purported guaranty is not an agreement to lend money, and it is therefore not governed by ? -9-2(7). ? Moreover, a trans perform is cover by the Statute of Frauds if it comes within any of the subsections of ? 8-9-2. ? Because Marys purported guaranty was covered by ? 8-9-2(3), it is irrelevant that it is excluded from the scope of another subsection of the statute. ?Third, Gulf Coast Motors argues, in reliance upon Nelson Realty Co. v. Darling support of Birmingham, Inc. , 267 Ala. 301, 101 So. 2d 78 (1957), that Mary committed fraud in the procural of the loans and that the Statute of Frauds therefore does not bar recovery. This argument is without merit because the Alabama Supreme Court recently held that an oral promise that is void by operation of the Statute of Frauds will not support an action against the promisor for promissory fraud. ? Bruce v. Cole, 854 So. 2d 47, 58 (Ala. 2003). ? To allow a promissory-fraud claim in such circumstances would cause the Statute of Frauds to become meaningless. ? Therefore, under Bruce, the promissory-fraud claim is barred because the underlying promise is barred by the Statute of Frauds. Holding H ow did the court resolve the issue(s)? Who won? Based on the foregoing, we conclude that Marys alleged promises to guaranty or repay Glenns debts were within the Statute of Frauds and, therefore, were not enforceable. ? Therefore, we reverse the trial courts judgment, and we remand the cause for the trial court to enter a judgment in Marys favor on all claims. turn AND REMANDED. Reasoning Explain the logic that supported the courts decision. Case Questions Be sure to address and thoroughly answer each and every case question and each part of each question. scathing Legal Thinking What is a guaranty contract? Explain.Business Ethics Did Glenn act ethically in this case? Would Mary have acted unethically if she had actually orally guaranteed to repay her husbands debts and then elevated the Statute of Frauds to prevent enforcement of the oral promises? modern-day Business Are guaranty contracts much used in business? move you think of a situation in which a guaranty contract w ould be required? Conclusion This should summarize the key aspects of the decision and also your recommendations on the courts ruling. FOOTNOTES 1. ?When the loans were creation made, Glenn was not working and had no assets in his own name. Mary has significant assets in her own name. 2. ?The parties do not debate the discrepancy between the promise to pay Sellers and Gulf Coast Motorss claim to be the obligee. ? We note that Gulf Coast Motors is referred to in the record both as a corporation and as Jerry Sellers d/b/a Gulf Coast Motors. 3. ?Sellers testified that he refinanced Glenn per Marys request and put all the old other checks in with the other account and redid it at $600 a month. MURDOCK, Judge. YATES, P. J. , and CRAWLEY and THOMPSON, JJ. , concur. PITTMAN, J. , recuses himself.?