UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

CASE NO. _______________ 

SUNBELT RENTALS, INC., 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

SUPREME MOBILE WELDING, LLC, 

and MATTHEW JOHNSTON, 

 Defendants. 

________________________________________/ 

COMPLAINT

 

Plaintiff, Sunbelt Rentals, Inc. (“Sunbelt”) files this complaint against Supreme Mobile 

Welding, LLC (“Supreme Mobile Welding”) and Matthew Johnston (“Johnston”). 

Parties 

1. Plaintiff Sunbelt is a corporation formed under the laws of North Carolina. Its 

principal place of business is in South Carolina. 

2. Defendant Supreme Mobile Welding is a limited liability company formed under 

the laws of the State of Florida. Upon information and belief, its members are resident citizens of 

the State of Florida. 

3. Upon information and belief, Defendant Johnston is an adult resident citizen of the 

State of Florida. 

Jurisdiction 

4. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1332 because there is complete diversity of citizenship between the parties and the amount in 

controversy exceeds $75,000 exclusive of costs. 

Case 2:20-cv-14166-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2020 Page 1 of 5
2 

5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because they conduct and 

transact business in the State of Florida and are citizens of the State of Florida. 

Venue 

6. Venue is proper in this jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because 

Defendants are resident citizens of this jurisdiction and conduct and transact business in this 

jurisdiction. 

Facts 

7. Sunbelt rents equipment to its customers for use primarily in construction projects. 

8. In January 2018, Johnston executed on Supreme Mobile Welding’s behalf a Sunbelt 

Application for Credit & Rental Agreement (the “Application”). 

9. Part of the Application included a provision for a personal guaranty (the 

“Guaranty”) of Supreme Mobile Welding’s debts to Sunbelt. 

10. Johnston executed in his individual capacity the Guaranty as Supreme Mobile 

Welding’s guarantor. 

11. A copy of the Application is attached as Exhibit 1. 

12. Sunbelt’s approval of the Application established an open account through which 

Supreme Mobile Welding could rent equipment from Sunbelt on credit. 

13. The Application contained contractual terms that apply to the open account (“Open 

Account Terms”). 

14. During 2019 and 2020, Sunbelt rented certain pieces of equipment (the 

“Equipment”) to Supreme Mobile Welding. 

15. Supreme Mobile Welding used the Equipment on construction projects. 

Case 2:20-cv-14166-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2020 Page 2 of 5
3 

16. Supreme Mobile Welding did not fully pay Sunbelt for the Equipment that Sunbelt 

rented to Supreme Mobile Welding for use with the projects. 

17. Unpaid invoices (the “Invoices”) reflecting the Equipment that Supreme Mobile 

Welding rented from Sunbelt are attached as Exhibit 2. 

18. An account summary showing the Invoices and late charges is attached as Exhibit 

3. 

19. Exhibit 3 reflects that the total unpaid principal amount of the Invoices and late 

charges is $137,040.29 (the “Principal Amount”). 

20. The Open Account Terms provide for a service charge that accrues at a rate of one 

and one-half percent (1.5%) per month on the balance of delinquent invoices until the invoices are 

fully paid. 

21. Exhibit 3 accurately calculates service charges accrued on the Invoices and late 

charges through May 20, 2020 as $14,039.24. 

22. Service charges continue to accrue. 

23. The Open Account Terms provide that Sunbelt can recover from Supreme Mobile 

Welding all the reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs it incurs to collect amounts Supreme Mobile 

Welding owes Sunbelt. 

Claim 1 – Breach of Contract 

24. Sunbelt incorporates the previous allegations presented in this complaint. 

25. The approved Application, the Invoices, and the Open Account Terms constituted 

a contract in which Sunbelt rented Supreme Mobile Welding the Equipment on an open account. 

26. Supreme Mobile Welding breached that contract by not fully paying Sunbelt for its 

rental of the Equipment. 

Case 2:20-cv-14166-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2020 Page 3 of 5
4 

27. Sunbelt suffered damages because of Supreme Mobile Welding’s breach of 

contract. 

Claim 2 – Breach of Guaranty 

28. Sunbelt incorporates the previous allegations presented in this complaint. 

29. Johnston executed the Guaranty as Supreme Mobile Welding’s Guarantor. 

30. Johnston has failed to pay Sunbelt the amounts Supreme Mobile Welding owes 

Sunbelt. 

31. Sunbelt has suffered damages because of Johnston’s breach of the Guaranty. 

Demand for Relief 

 ACCORDINGLY, Sunbelt respectfully requests that the Court enter a judgment in 

Sunbelt’s favor granting the following relief against Defendants jointly and severally: 

i. the Principal Amount, 

ii. accrued service charges that have accrued to date and that will continue to accrue 

until the Principal Amount is fully collected, 

iii. attorneys’ fees and other costs Sunbelt has incurred and will incur to collect the 

amounts Defendants owe Sunbelt, 

iv. pre-judgment interest, 

v. post-judgment interest, and 

vi. any other relief the Court deems appropriate. 

 

 

Case 2:20-cv-14166-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2020 Page 4 of 5
5 

Dated: May 26, 2020. 

Respectfully submitted, 

 

 SUNBELT RENTALS, INC. 

 By: /s/ Raymond L. Robin 

Raymond L. Robin 

Keller Landsberg PA 

Broward Financial Centre 

500 E. Broward Boulevard, Suite 1400 

Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33394 

(954) 761-3550 

Attorney for Sunbelt Rentals, Inc. 

52929180.v1 

Case 2:20-cv-14166-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/26/2020 Page 5 of 5