I N T H E SUPR EM E C O UR T O F M I SS I SS I PPI NO. 2 0 1 3 - CA- 0 1 1 4 2 - S CT M EL AN I E B OS AR GE
v. LWC M S PROPER TI

ES, LLC
D A T E O F JU D G M E N T : 06/ 25/ 2013 TRI AL J UDG E: HON
. ROBER T P
. KREBS TRI AL C OU RT A TTOR NEY S: NI CH OLA S VA N W I SER RU S S E L L M ANNI NG M I CH AEL L. FON DR EN COURT F ROM W HI CH APP EAL ED: J ACKSON COUNTY CI RCUI T COURT ATTO RN EY FO R A PP ELLAN T: M I CH AEL L. FON DR EN ATTO RN EY FO R A PP ELLEE: NI CH OLA S VA N W I SER NATURE OF THE CAS E: CI VI L - CONTRACT D I SPO SI T I O N : R E V E R SE D A N D R E M A N D E D - 02/ 26/ 2015 M OT I ON F OR RE HE AR I NG F I L E D: M ANDAT E I S S UE D: B E F O R E R A N D O L P H , P . J. , P I E R C E A N D K I N G , JJ. PI ERCE, J UST I CE, FOR TH E COU RT: ¶1. T hi s appea l ar i s es f r om an O r der G r ant i ng M ot i on f or Sum m ary J udgm ent and Fi nal Ju d g m e n t aw a rd in g L W C M S P ro p e rties , L L C (“ L W C ” ) a ju d g m e n t ag a in st M e lan ie B os ar ge ( “B os ar ge”)
. T he tr i al cour tf ound t hatB os ar ge w as i ndi vi dual l y l i abl e f ort he d e fic ien c y b a lan c e a fte r fo re c lo su re u n d e r th e ter m s o f a p e rso n a l g u a ra n ty sh e e x e c u ted in relati o n to a sec u red loa n m ad e to h er c o m p an y , In d ian H ea d S tat ion , L L C (“In d ian H ea d ”). O n a p p e a l, B o s a rg e c o n te n d s a m a te ri a l is s u e o f f a c t e x is te d , in tera lia , as t o t he val ue of t he propert y securi ng t he d ebt, t hat LW C sho u ld n o t ha v e been perm i t t ed to m ai ntai n suitas a

### 2

di s s ol ve d c orpo r a t i on , a nd t ha tBos a r ge s ho ul d h a ve be e n a l l owed t o a mend he rpl eadi ngs and ans w erunderM i s s i s s i ppi R ul e of C i vi l P r ocedur e 15. T hi s C our tr ever s es and r emands
w i t h r es pectt o s um m ary j udgm ent , and f i nds t he se cond and thi r d i s s ues s houl d be addr es s ed by t he tr i al cour tupon r emand. S TATEM ENT OF FACTS ¶2. O n Sept ember 22, 2008, L W C , t hr ough i t s ow ner , L arr y C ooper , obt ai ned a bal l oon pr om i s s or y not e f

or$3, 500, 000 ( pl us i nt er es t ) f r om I ndi an H ead. I ndi an H ead’ s ow nerand onl y m emberw as M el ani e B os ar ge. T he not e w as s ecur ed by a D eed of Trus tf orthe I ndi an H ead pr oper t y, and w as , i n ef f ect , a pur chas e- m oney tr ans act i on t o buy the pr oper t y and
r epai rda m age t o t he pr oper t y’ s hot el f r om H urr i cane K atr i na. T he not e r equi r ed I ndi an H ead to m ak e m o n thly interest p ay m en ts an d sati sfac ti o n o f th e e n ti re u n p aid a m o u n t at th e n o te’s
ma tu r a t i o n . Bos a r g e s e p a r a t e l y s i g n e d an i n d i v i d u a l c o n t i n u i n g g u a r a n t y i n f a v o ro f LW C t hatw oul d m ake he rper s onal l y l i abl e f orthe unpai d amount i n the ev entI ndi an H ead d e fa u lte d
. ¶3. T he not e and de ed of t rus tcont ai ned the f

ol l ow i ng r el evantl anguage : Fort he purpos e of

i nduci ng L W C M S Prope r t i es , L L C , ( herei naft ercal l ed “Lender ”) , t o advanc e, cont i nue orf ur t herext end cr edi tt o I ndi an H ead St at i on, L L C , ( her ei naf t ercal l ed “Cust om er ”) , the under s i gned ( her ei naf t er col l ect i vel y cal l ed “G uar ant or ” w hetherone orm or e) , guar ant ees t he pr om pt and f ul l paym entt o L enderof al l i ndebt ednes s and l i abi l i t i es of C us t om erof al l ki nds w hi ch ar e now orher ei naf t erm ay be ow i ng t o L ender( w hether cr eat ed di r ect l y ora cqui r ed by Lenderi ndi r ect l y by as s i gnm entorotherw i s e, and w hethernow exi s t i ng orhereaf t erar i s i ng, abs ol ut e orcont i ngent , j oi nt a n d /o r se v e ra l, d u e o r to b e c o m e d u e , p rim a ry o r se c o n d a ry , an d a ll ren e w a ls and ext ens i ons t her eof

) up t o t he pr i nci pal amount of T hr ee M i l l i on Fi ve H u n d red T h o u san d D o ll ars a n d N o /10 0 ($3 , 5 0 0 , 0 0 0
. 0 0 ) an d in ad d it ion , all r el at ed i nt er es t , at t or ney’ s f ees , col l ect i on cos t s and otherf ees and cha r ges of an y n ature an d k ind , h ere after referred to as d em an d by L en d er. G u ara n tor’s

### The r ec ord doe s not st at e whe n this default oc cur re d. In LWC’s Moti on for 1 

### Summ ar y Judgm ent , LWC ref

er enc es theaf

fi davi t of S charlean Cooper , s tating “Indian Hea d defa

ult ed under

the te rm s of theNote and Deed of Trus t by fai ling to makethe a gre edupon payme nts to LWC when s am e be camedue, ” but nei the r LWC nor

Cooper enl ight ene d this Co urt to the date of defau lt, o r h owmany payments hadb een mad e prio r to th at defau lt. Pre sum ably, i f a

def ault occ urr ed, it happe ned som etim e betwee n Septe mbe r 2008 2 

### and May 2011. 3 l i abi l i t y her eundermay underno ci r cumst ance s be af f ect ed ori m pai r ed by the exi s t ence , f

r om t i m e t o t i m e, of t ot al obl i gat i ons ow i ng by C us t om ert o L ender in e x c e s s o f th e a m o u n t h e re in g u a ra n tee d . T h is is th e C o n tin u in g G u a ra n ty w hi ch w i l l r emai n i n ef f ectun t i l al l of

t he obl i gat i ons ar e f

ul l y r epai d and sati sfi ed b y C u stom er G u ara n tor. T he g uarant y further con t ai ned a no t i ce t o B osarge, w hich st at ed as fol l ow s: Y ou ar e bei ng as ked t o guar ant ee thi s debt
. T hi nk car ef ul l y bef or e you do s o. If th e b o rrow er d o esn ’tp ay the d eb t, y o u w il l hav e to. B e su re y o u ca n affo rd t o pay i f you have t o, and thatyou w antt o acce ptt hi s r es pons i bi l i t y. Y ou m ay have t o pay up t o t he f

ul l am ountof the debti f t he bor r ow erdoes notpay. Y ou m a y als o h a v e to p a y late fe e s o r c o llec tio n c o sts , w h ich in c re a se th is a m o u n t. T he L enderc a n c ol l e c tt hi s de btf r om you w i t ho utf

i r s tt r yi ng t o c ol l e c tt he debtf r om t he bo r r ower . The Len de rc a n u s e the s a me c ol l e c t i on methods agai ns tyou t hatcan be us ed aga i ns tthe borr ow er , s uch as s ui ng you, g a r n i s h i n g y o u rwa g e s , e t c . I f t h i s d e b ti s e v e ri n d e f

a u l t , t h a tf

a c tma y b e c o me a partof yourcr edi tr ecor d. ¶4. L W C al l eged I nd i an H ead l at er defaul t ed b y fail ing to p ay the m o n thly int eres t payment s . U pon I ndi an H ead’ s def aul t , L W C decl ar ed t he ent i r e not e amountdue, w hi ch 1
w as $3, 500, 000 pl us i nt er es tand ot hercost s . L W C does nots peci f y t he dat e of

def aul t , and t h e r e c o r d p o i n t s o n l y t o LW C’ s s u b s e q u e n tf o r e c l o s u r e pr o c e e d i n g s i n M a y 20 1 1
. LW C 2
o b tain e d a n a p p ra isa l o f th e p ro p e rty se c u rin g the loa n in A p ril 2 0 1 0 tha t ap p ra ise d th e fa ir
ma r k e tv a l u e o f

t h e p r o p e r t y a t$ 9 0 0 , 0 0 0 a s o f M a r c h 2 5 , 2 0 1 0
. Sh o r t l y t h e r e a f t e r , LW C conduct ed a f

or ecl os ur e s al e. A r epr es ent at i ve f orL W C s ubm i t t ed the onl y bi d att he auc t i on
a n d b o u g h t th e p ro p e rt y w ith a b id fo r $ 1 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0
.

### 4

¶ 5
. Af

t e rf o r e c l o s u r e , LW C r e s o l d t h e pr o p e r t y f o r$1 , 2 0 0 , 0 0 0
. Fo l l o wi n g t h e s a l e , LW C appl i ed the O ct ober2011 s al e pr i ce t o t he amounti tcl ai m ed B os ar ge ow ed, t her eby r educi ng t he over al l amount i ts oughtfr om B os ar ge t o $2, 300, 000. Pur s uantt o the t erm s of the not e, i n ad dit i on t o the ove ral l i nd ebtedness, Indi an H ead ag reed t o p ay att orney’s f ees, plus cost s, in th e e v e n t itd e fa u lted . P u rsu a n t to th e ter m s o f th e g u a ra n ty , B o sa rg e m a d e h e rse lf i ndi vi dual l y l i abl e f

orthe i ndebt ednes s ow ed by I ndi an H ead t o LW C , i ncl udi ng a l l cos t s of
c o lle c tio n , c o u rt c o s ts , a n d a tto rn e y ’s fe e s . P ROCE DURAL HI S TORY ¶6. L W C f

i l ed a com plai nt al l eging tw o cou nts ag ai ns tB os ar ge. L W C al l eged that B os ar ge w as i ndebt ed t o L W C f or$2, 250, 000, as the def i ci ency ba l ance u nderthe not e. L W C f ur t heral l eged thatB os ar ge had c om m i t t ed w i l l f ul a nd mal i ci ous w as t e by r emovi ng
cert ai n f i xtur es f r om t he f

or ecl os ed pr oper t y, w hi ch LW C cl ai m s caus ed damage t ot al i ng $500, 000
. A ddi t i onal l y, L W C s oughtatt orney’ s f ees i n the amountof

$75, 000 f

ora t ot al j ud gm ent of

$2 , 82 5, 00 0, plus i nter estand cost s. ¶7. B os ar ge, appea r i ng pro se , f i l ed her ans w er and aff i rm at i ve def

ens es , i ncl udi ng an af f i davi ti n w hi ch s he mai nt ai ned the $3, 500, 000 had neverbeen tr ans f err ed t o I ndi an H ead. A f t era l eng t hy di s c ov e r y p e r i od , LW C f i l e d a M ot i on f

orSummary J ud gmen ta nd an
a c c o m p a n y in g m e m o ra n d u m b rie f. A fte r re tain in g c o u n se l, B o sa rg e filed a n a n sw e r to L W C ’ s br i ef

, and B os ar ge fur t herm oved f ort i m e t o compl et e di s covery, t o obt ai n an ap p raisal, an d to su b m ita fo rm al an sw er to L W C ’s s u m m ary jud g m en t m o ti o n . T h e c o u rt

### Bosargesubs eque ntly fi le d a Motio n to Di sm is s on t he ba si s of

LWC’s 3 

### adm ini strative di ss olution. LWC re noti ce d it s vari ous motionsand Bos arge notic ed he r Moti on to Dis mi ss f

or thes am e dat e. It

was only a ft er

Bosargenoti ce d her

motion and se nt a copy t o L WC ’ s c ouns e lthat LW C re a l i z e d that

i t ha d b e e n a dm i ni s tr at i ve ly di s s olve d. Ther ea ft er , LWC’ s couns eltook the nec es sary st eps to re ins tateLWC with theOff ic e of the Secretaryof S tate andpro vid ed th e do cuments to th e trial court as an exh ibit to its resp on se to Bosarge ’s Moti on to Di sm is s. Ultim at ely, LWC wa s reinst at ed, and c ould properly maintainits su it again st Bo sarge. See Mis s. Code Ann. § 79-4- 14.21( f) (Re v. 2013) (prov i ding“ A c or

po r at i onthat

h a s b e e n a dm i ni s tr at i ve ly di s s olve d m ay no t m a i nt a i n any ac ti on, s uit

or proce eding in any court of thi s s tateunti l t

he c orporation i s reinst at ed. ”) 5 t hen ent er ed an or derhol di ng L W C ’ s summ ary j udgm entm ot i on i n abeyanc e. I n doi ng s o, t he tr i al cour tal l ow ed B os ar ge an a ddi t i onal thi r t y days t o compl et e di s covery. 3 ¶8
. B o sa rg e s u b se q u e n tly file d a d e sig n ati o n o f ex p ert, n am ing the a p p ra ise r, K im Seaman, a s he re xper tw i t nes s . Sea m an per f or m ed an appr ai s al of

the s ubj ectpr oper t y, w hi ch
w as at t ache d t o t he des i gnat i on, s how i ng an appr ai s ed val ue of $3, 400, 000 as o f A pr i l 13, 2010. O n t he s ame dat e, B os ar ge f i l ed hers uppl eme nta l r es pons e t o L W C ’ s M ot i on f or S u m m a ry Ju d g m e n t. ¶9. I n her r es pons e t o L W C ’ s M ot i on f or S um m ary Judg m ent, B os ar ge cont ended that t her e w er e genui ne i s s ues of f actt hatcoul d be det erm i ned onl y by a j ury. Speci f i cal l y, B o sa rg e to o k d ire c t issu e w ith th e a p p ra isa l am o u n t su b m itt e d b y L W C v a lu in g th e p ro p e rty
a t $ 9 0 0 ,0 0 0 , b o th in lig h t o f th e a p p ra isa l co n d u c ted b y S e a m a n a n d b e c a u se th e p ro p e rty
w as w or t h m or e than thi s am ou nt i n i t s pos t - K atr i na s t at e, pr i ort o the $600, 000 w or th of
r enovat i ons B osar ge made on t he hot el
. A nd f ur t her , B os ar ge al l eges s he w as r equi r ed by L W C t o i ns ur e the pr oper ty f orm or e than $2, 000, 000, t o f ur t herherpoi ntthatthe hot el w as
w or t h m or e than i t s appr ai s ed val ue. M or eover , B os ar ge argues, L W C ’ s appr ai s al w as i nacc ur at e and poor l y conduct ed–eve n by t he appr ai s er ’s st andar ds
. Forexampl e, t he

### 6

a p p ra isa l cla im e d th a t, in o rd e r f o r th e a p p ra isa l to b e m in im a lly re liab le, th e a p p ra ise r w o u ld have t o i ns pectatl eas tt en per centof t he pr oper t y. H e admi t s , t hough, t o vi ew i ng onl y one
o f th e h o tel ’s si x ty-six ro o m s. F u rth er, B o sarg e p o ints to th e b asis for L W C ’s ap p raiser’s l ow valuat i on , w here usi ng t he incom e app roach o f apprai sal , L W C ’s app rai serdid not use any of I ndi an H ead’ s actual i ncome dat a i n gener at i ng an appr ai s al of the hot el ’ s w or th. In ste a d , the a p p ra ise r u se d c a lcu latio n s fr o m in c o m p a ra b le m o tels , w h e re in c o m e w a s h a lf to a q u a rte r o f th a t w h ich In d ian H e a d h isto ric a lly m a d e . B o sa rg e fu rth e r a lleg e d , an d th is C our tw oul d f

i nd m os tcentr al , t hatnei t hers he norI ndi an H ead r ece i ved the f ul l $3, 500, 000
ow ed underthe n ot e . Bos a r ge c l a i med I nd i a n H e a d pu r c ha s e d t he h ot e l a nd p r op e r t y a nd i nves t ed i n r enovat i ons ; buts he as s ert ed the r emai nderof t he $3, 500, 000 w as never t r ans f err ed t o herorI ndi an H ead. O t herthan B os ar ge’ s a f f i davi t , ne i t herpa r t y has of f er ed
a n y o t h e re v i d e n c e t o c o n f i r m o rr e f

u t e th i s c l a i m. ¶1 0
. T h e tria l c o u rt s e t L W C ’s M o ti o n to C o m p el D isco v ery an d M o ti o n for S u m m ary J udgm entf

orJ une 6, 2013, by f

i at . A f t erw ar d, B os ar ge f

i l ed a M ot i on t o A m end heror i gi nal
ans w erand a M ot i on t o Fi l e C ount er cl ai m . T hes e mot i ons w er e s ett o be he ar d a tthe J une 6 h e a rin g a s w e ll. ¶11. O n J une 6, 2013, t he t r i al cour t gr ant ed L W C ’ s M ot i on f or Sum m ary J udgm entand
or der ed thata f

i nal j udgm entbe ent er ed. T he cour tfound t hatal l ot herpendi ng m ot i ons ( L W C ’ s m ot i ons t o compel and B os ar ge’ s m ot i ons t o amend, fi l e a count er cl ai m , and d ism iss) w ere m o o t i n li g h t of th e ru li n g o n su m m ary jud g m en t. T h ere after, the tria l co u rt ent er ed i t s O r derG r ant i ng M ot i on f orSum m ary J udgm entand Fi nal J udgm ent , aw ar di ng L W C a j udgm entagai ns tB osarge in t he amountof $2, 670, 000, w hi ch i ncl uded ac crued

### 7

i nt er es tunt i l J une 1, 2013, and i nt er es tther eaf t eratthe rat e o f s even pe r centperannum goi ng f or w ar d. ¶12. Subse quent l y, B os ar ge t i m el y f i l ed herN ot i ce of

A ppeal i n thi s a ct i on, s ett i ng up the instan t app ea l. B o sarg e ra ises three issue s o n a p p ea l, b u t be ca u se the lat ter tw o issue s w ere d ism iss e d w ith o u t co n s id e ra tio n b y th e trial c o u rt a fte r it g ra n ted su m m a ry ju d g m e n t, th is C our taddr es s es onl y t he f i r s t , r egar di ng summ ary j udgm ent . T hi s i s s ue i s r es t at ed as fol l ow s: W h ether a m ateri al i ssue of f act exi st s as t o the a m ou n t of i n d eb tedn ess o we d b y I n d i a n He a d a s d e b t o r , o r b y Bo s a r g e a s g u a r a n t o r , t o LW C. ¶13. B eca us e w e cannot di scer n w hether Indi an H ead m ade i nt er es t payment s , w hether
cre d itex ist ed fo r p ri n cipa l red u cti o n , a n d w h ethe r the co u rt ’s ord er a cc o u n ted fo r B o sarg e’s cont ent i on conce r ni ng t he amountt r ans f err ed f r om LW C t o I ndi an H ead, w e f i nd s i gni f

i cant fac tual d ispu tes ex istas to th e am o u n t of ind eb tedn ess o w ed b y In d ian H ea d o r B o sarg e. In
rev ersing su m m ary jud g m en t i n li g h t of th e e x ist en ce o f m a ter ial fac tual issue s, this C o u rt addi t i onal l y r emands w i t h i ns t ruct i ons f ort he l ow ercourtt o cons i dert he otherm ot i ons pendi ng att he t i m e s um m ary j udgm entw as gr ant ed. DI S CU S S I ON ¶14
. In rev iew ing a tri al c o u rt ’s grantof a m oti on forsum m ary j ud gm ent, th is C o u rt conduct s a de novo re vi ew and “exami nes al l t he evi dent i ary m att er s bef or e i t

— admi s s i ons i n p l e a di ng s , a ns w e r s t o i nt e r r og a t or i e s , de po s i t i on s , a f f i da vi t s , e t c. ” Cit

y of Jacks on v. Sutton , 797 So. 2d 977, 979 ( M i s s . 2001)
. The movi ng pa r t y ha s the bur den of demonstr at i ng t hatno genui ne i s s ue of m at er i al f

actexi s t s , and the nonmovi ng par t y m us tbe gi ven the

### 8

b e n e fi t o f t h e d o u b t c o n c e rn in g th e e x is te n c e o f a m a te ri a l f a c t. I d. “ I f no genui ne i s s ue of
m aterial fac t exists an d the m o v ing pa rty is en ti tl ed to jud g m en t as a m att er o f l aw , su m m ary j udgm ent shou l d be ent er ed i n t hatpar t y’ s f avor . ” Mo n sa n to Co . v. H a ll , 912 So. 2d 134, 1 3 6 (M iss. 2 0 0 5 ). A d d it ion all y , this co u rtrev iew s co n clus ion s o f l aw , inclu d ing statu tory in te rp re ta tio n , de novo
. J . Cris s B u ilde r, In c . v. W h ite , 35 So. 3d 541, 543 ( M i s s . C t . A pp. 2 0 0 9 ). W h e n a m o tio n fo r su m m a ry ju d g m e n t is m a d e a n d s u p p o rte d a s p ro v id e d in M issi ssipp i R u le of C ivil P roc ed u re 5 6 , an ad v erse p arty m ay n o t res t u p o n th e m ere
a lleg a tio n s o r d e n ials o f th e p lea d in g s, b u t in ste a d th e re sp o n se m u st s e t fo rth sp e c ific f a c ts
s h o w in g th e re is a g e n u in e is s u e fo r t ri a l. Mil lerv. Meeks , 76 2 S o. 2d 30 2, 30 4 (M i ss. 2000)
. I f a ny tr i abl e i s s ues of

f acte xi s t , the t r i al c our t ’ s de ci s i on t o gr ants um m ary j udgm ent
w ill b e re v e rs e d
. I

d. ¶15. T he t r i al cour t gr ant ed s um m ary j udgm ent i n f avor of L W C af

t er f i ndi ng no m at er i al fa c tu a l issu e e x iste d to p re c lu d e ju d g m e n t. T h e o rd e r g ra n tin g su m m a ry ju d g m e n t is repr od uced below , as f

oll ow s: H av in g co m e o n this da y for c o n side rati o n o n the M o ti o n for S u m m ary J udgm entf

i l ed by a nd on behal f

of [ L W C ] and the [ c] our thavi ng cons i der ed t he M ot i on and the M emorandu m B r i ef i n s uppor tt her eof

t ogetherw i t h the exhi bi t s t her et o as w el l as t he r es pons e thathas been fi l ed on beha l f of [ B os ar ge] and havi ng r eview ed the pl eadi ngs and cons i der ed ar gum ent s and r epr es ent at i ons of

couns el and s peci f

i cal l y havi ng r evi ew ed the l oan document s and the per s onal guar anty f or m i ng the bas i s f

or thi s l aw s ui t , t he [ c] our ti s of

t he opi ni on t her e exi s t s no genui ne i s s ue of any mat er i al f

actand t hat[ L W C ] i s [ ent i t l ed] t o j udgm entas a mat t erof l aw ; i ti s f

ur t her O r der ed and A dj udged, t hatupon t he or e t e nus o bjec t i on t o the quantum of a tto rn e y ’s f

e e s m a d e b y [B o s a rg e ] t o [L W C ’s] c laim o f $ 7 6 6 ,5 9 0 .0 0 in att o rne y ’s fees c o u n se l for [L W C ] ag ree d to w aive an y claim for a tt o rne y ’s f ees . The [

c] our tis ther ef

or e of the opi ni on thatj udgm ent s hould be enter ed by separat e j udgm ent

, i n the am ountof

$2, 250, 000. 00, pl us i nt er es tatthe

### We areconfi dent that Bosarge is li abl e unde r the guaranty, but m er ely ques ti on the 4 

### am ount f or whi ch s he i s l ia

ble . I t is truethat

the note , thede ed of tr

ust and the guaranty e ac h des cribea $3, 500,000 indebt edne ss , but Bosargeshoul d be li abl e only for theam ount of mone y or va lueof property rec ei ved by he r or Indi an He ad that

was not repa id. Note , though, that

unlike s uit s whe rethele nd er sues thepri mary bor rowe r, an 5 

### individua l guaranty ( as wri tt en in thec ontrac ts a ppli ca bleher e) does not requirefor ec los ure or f airne ss of pric e. The guarantor is immedi at ely li abl e upon the bor rowe r’ s ( in t

his ca se , Indi an He ad’ s) def

ault. Howe ver , in order

to de te rm inetheam ount Bos arge owe s, thejudge still need s to d o th e requ isite credit-to -balan ce deficien cy calcu lation . Thus, B osarg e is inc orrec t whe n shecl ai ms L WC w as require d to s how thefor ec los uresa lepri cewas fa ir , ci tingHa rtma n v. M

cInn is , 996 So. 2d 704, 711 ( Mis s. 2007) ( ci ting La ke H illside E states, Inc . v . Gal loway , 473 So. 2d 461, 466 ( Mis s. 1985)) , that “whe rethefor ec los ing c re dit or buys at f ore cl osure, it

mus t give the debtor

fa ir cr edi t f or thec omm erci al ly re as onabl e va lue of thec ol l at e r a l
. ” He r e , B os argei s n ot thed ebt or ; s hei s theguar ant or , and n o s uch dem onstrati on is re quired. 9 c o n tr a c t r a te o

f 7 % a c c r u in gfr o m S e

p te m b e r1 , 2 0 1 0 fo r w a r d
. T h e [c] o u rt f i nd s tha ti nt e r e s ti s a c c rui ng , p r e - j ud gmen ta tthe r a t e o f

7 % p erannum (or m ont hl y att he r at e of

$13, 125. 00 ( perm ont h) fr om Sept ember1, 2012 t hr ough M a y 3 1 , 2 0 1 3 fo r a to tal p re -ju d g m e n t in ter e st a c c ru a l o f $ 4 2 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 ; itis there fore O r der ed and Ad

j udged, thatj udgm ent

be enter ed i n the am ountof $2, 250, 000. 00, bei ng the pr i nci palam ountr em ai ni ng due underthe per s onal g u a ra n tee p lu s $ 4 2 0 ,0 0 0 .0 0 o f in ter e st a c c ru in gfro m S e p tem b e r 1 , 2 0 1 0 , u n til Jun e 1, 2 01 3 f

orw ard f or a total of

$2 , 67 0, 00 0. 00 , w hich am ou nt s ha l lcarry i nter est at the co ntr act r ate of

7% per an nu m f

rom Jun e 1, 20 13 f

orw ard
. O r der ed and A dj udged, the [ c] our tf i nds thata l l ot herpendi ng m ot i ons o n e ith e r sid e a re h e re b y d ism iss e d a s m o o t. ( E m phas i s a dd e d. ) A s i t e r a t e d i n t he o r de r , the c ou r tf ou nd the t ot a l a mounto w e d w as $2, 670, 000, and a f

i nal j udgm entagai ns tB os ar ge w as ent er ed f or$2, 670, 000. ¶16. B eca us e w e ca nnotconf i r m t hatthe t ot al i ndebt ednes s ow ed i s , i n f act , $3, 500, 000, this C o u rtfind s a m aterial fac tual issu e d o es ex ist , a n d tha t i ts ex ist en ce p rec lud es su m m ary j udgm ent . A s pl ai nt i f

f i n t hi s act i on, L W C has t he bur den t o est abl i s h t he amountow ed as 4 t h e f i r s ts t e p t o o b t a i n i n g a d e f i c i e n c y j u d g me n tf

o l l o wi n g f

o r e c l o s u r e . Noto n l y d o e s LW C

5

### 10

fa il t o e sta b lish th a t ite v e r tra n sfe rr e d $ 3 ,5 0 0 ,0 0 0 to In d ian H e a d , ita lso fa ils to in d ica te
w h e th e r a n y p a y m e n ts h a d b e e n m a d e to w a rd th e a lleg e d $ 3 ,5 0 0 ,0 0 0 d e b t. If an y p a y m e n ts h ad b ee n m ad e o v er the tw en ty-so m e m o n ths b etw ee n the o ri g ination o f th e loa n an d L W C ’s f o r e c l o s u r e , t h e y wo u l d c e r t a i n l y b e c e n t r a l t o a n y d e t e r mi n a t i o n o f th e r e ma i n d e ro we d
. As t he movanti n i t s M ot i on f orSum m ary J udgm ent , L W C has the bur den t o pr ove no mat er i al fa c tu a l m a tter e x ists, a n d in a b se n c e o f th a t p ro o f, B o sa rg e is g iv e n th e b e n e fit o f th e d o u b t. H e re , if v iew e d in th e li g h t m o st fa v o ra b le to B o sa rg e , it w o u ld ap p e a r s o m e m o n th ly payment s w er e made i n t he nea r l y t w o year s betw een the l oan’ s ori gi nat i on and t he al l eged defaul t , and t hat these pa ym ents w ou l d n ecessar i l y off sets om e po rt i on of the indeb t edn ess L W C c la im s it is o w e d
. ¶17. B ot h L W C and B os ar ge f ocus m or e on di s put i ng t he w or t h of t he ho t el f or ecl os ed upon, des pi t e the f

actt hatB os ar ge has cons i s t ent l y as s ert ed s he neve rr ece i ved $3, 500, 000, and thats he evi dence d t hi s cont ent i on i n herD ece m ber2012 af f i davi t . W e not e thatt he gr avi tus of

B os ar ge’ s ar gum enti s herw eak c ont ent i on t hats he i s notl i abl e undert he i ndi vi dual guar anty. B os ar ge and he ratt orney r el y on uns ubs t ant i at ed as s ert i ons t hat , pr i or t o L arr y C ooper ’ s death, C oopert ol d B os ar ge he w oul d ne vere xpecthe rt o r epay the money i n t he eve ntt hatdef

aul toccurr ed. A nd f

ur t her , B os ar ge, t hr ough hercounse l , chal ks up t he guar anty t o a f

or m al i t y and pos i t s , s om ew hatvaguel y, t hatthe $3, 500, 000 amount w as d e riv e d fro m a n a n ticip a ted tax sc h e m e to b e n e fit to C o o p e r. In d o in g so , B o sa rg e a ttem p ts to u se p a ro l ev id e n c e to e sc a p e a le g a l ob lig a tio n . U p o n rev iew o f th e p ro m iss o ry n o te to I ndi an H ead a nd t he guar anty s i gned by B os ar ge, t her e i s nothi ng to s ugges tt hatB os ar ge

### 11

w oul d notbe l i abl e upon def aul t , as t he i ns t rum ent s appeart o be prope r l y exec ut ed, r ecor ded, and ac know l edged, and ar e thus val i d and enf or cea bl e. ¶18. St i l l , t he t ot al amount of i ndebt ednes s app l i ed i n t his m att err emai ns pr obl emat i c. A l t hough B os ar ge’ s or i gi nal pr es ent at i on of the i s s ue w as w hethers he r ece i ved the pr oper
cr edi tf orherhot el ( pr edi cat ed on the f actt hats he thi nks i tw as w or t h s i gni f i cant l y m or e and L W C ’ s a pp r a i s a l s e e ms t o be woef ul l y f l a w e d a nd i nc ompl e t e ) , we i ntui th eri s s ue pr es ent at i on i s actual l y t he i nver s e of a more m er i t or i ous cont ent i on, w hich she has
cons i s t ent l y m ade f

r om t he s t ar t : t hati s , t hatshe neve rre cei ved t he $3, 500, 000, ort hatthe t rue i ndebt ednes s ow ed i s uns ubs t ant i at ed. ¶19. B eca us e B os ar ge’ s br i ef oppos i ng s um m ary j udgm entdoe s pr es enta genui ne f actual i ss ue, s peci f

i cal l y, how m uch money w as t r ans f err ed betw een LW C and I ndi an H ead/ B os ar ge, t hi s C our tm us tre ver s e s um m ary j udgm ent . T he tr i al cour ts eems t o t ake the sig n e d p ro m iss o ry n o te a n d d e e d o f tru st a t fac e v a lu e to m e a n th a t $ 3 ,5 0 0 ,0 0 0 w a s, in fa c t, excha nged, and does s o w i t houtc ons i der at i on of a ny pa ym ent s I ndi an H ead may have made. A g a in , th e re is l itt le B o sa rg e ca n d o to e sc a p e liab ili ty u n d e r th e g u a ra n ty , b u t th e g u a ra n ty is effec ti v e o n ly i n so far as a co u rtcan de term ine w h at sh e o w es. A s relay ed ea rl ier, the c o u rt can de t erm i ne w hatB os ar ge ow es onl y by i nves t i gat i ng t he d ocu m ents . T hi s di s cr epanc y
w as notr econc i l ed i n the r ecor d by t he cour torLW C , even though B os ar ge r ai s ed doubton t he is sue fr om t he incepti on of this case. T his f actual qu est i on , that i s the tot al i nd ebtedness
ow ed, is an i s s ue t o be det erm i ned by the j ury. A nd t he above i s s ues s houl d, upon
c o n sid e ra tio n , p re c lu d e su m m a ry ju d g m e n t.

### 12

¶20. T hus , w e f

i nd t her e w er e cl ear l y f

act s i n di s put e t hat pr ecl uded t he t r i al cour t ’ s gr ant of s um m ary j udgm ent . Fi r s t , t he amountr ece i ved by B os ar ge w as di s put ed eve n bef or e the M ot i on f orSum m ary J udgm entw as m ade, and t he cr edi tgi ven–as i ti s bas ed s ol el y upon L W C ’ s a l l eged f

l aw ed appr ai s al –al s o c r eat es a ge nui ne i s s ue of f actt hatm us tbe s ubm i t t ed t o a j ur y f

ordet erm i nati on . A ccor di ngl y, thi s C our tr ever s es the tr i al cour t ’ s or derf or
s um m ary j ud gm ent and r emands w i t h i ns t ruct i ons t o the tr i al cour tt o r es um e the s ui tand
cons i dert he otherm ot i ons pendi ng atthe t i m e s um m ary j udgm entw as gr ant ed. CO NC L US I ON ¶2 1. T hi s C our tre ver s es summ ar y j ud gmen t , a s mat e r i a l f a c tua l qu e s t i on s r e m ai n f or d e ter m in a tio n b y a ju ry ; sp e c ifica lly , q u e stio n s o f f a c t e x ist re g a rd in g th e v a lu e o f th e h o tel, t he r el i abi l i t y of

t he s ubm i t t ed appr ai s al s , the am ountof f unds actual l y t r ans f

err ed t o B os ar ge
orI ndi an H ead, and the amountand numberof any paymen t s m ade pur s uantt o thatl oan. A l t hough notaddr es s ed by thi s C ou rt , the othercl ai m s r ai s ed i n thi s appea l s houl d be
cons i der ed by the tr i al cour tupon r emand. ¶ 2 2
. RE VE RS ED AND RE M ANDE D. W A LL ER , C . J. , D I C K I N SO N A N D R A N D O LP H , P. JJ . , LA M A R , K I TC H EN S, CHANDL ER , KI NG AND COL EM AN, J J . , CONCUR.