# FILED Ap ril 30, 1997 Cecil W. Crowson Ap pellate Cou rt Clerk FIRST FARM ERS AN D MER CHAN TS ) NATIONAL BANK O F COLUMBIA , ) a national banki ng associat ion with ) its princi pal office in Colu mbia, ) Maury C ounty, Tennessee, ) ) Plaintiff/Appellee, ) Appeal No. ) 01-A-01-9608- CV-00381 VS. ) ) Maury Circuit BURT BROTHERS FURNITURE CO., ) No. 6746 INC., WILLIAM W. HARDISON, SR., ) and DOROTHY M. HARDISON, ) individually, and d/b/a Burt ) Brothers Fur niture Co., I nc., ) ) Defendants/Ap pellants. )

COURT OF APPE ALS OF TENNESSEE MIDDLE SECTION AT NASHVILLE APPEALE D FRO M THE C IRCU IT COU RT OF M AURY COUN TY AT COLUMBIA, TEN NESSEE THE HONORABLE JIM T. HAMI LTON, JUDGE
THOMAS H. PEEB LES, IV WALLER LANSDEN DORTCH & DAVIS 809 South Main St reet, Suite 300 P. O. Box 1035 Columbia, TN 38402- 1035 Attorney for Plaintiff/Appellee DELILAH A. SPEE D P. O. Box 973 Columbia, Tennessee 38402 Attorney for Defendant/Appellant

AFFIRMED AND REMAN DED

BEN H. CAN TRELL, JUDGE CONCUR: TODD, P.J., M .S. LEW IS, J.- 2 - 

## O P I N I O N

The primary question in this case is whether a wife’s g uara nty o f her husband’s debts covers debts for which he later b ecame obli gated as a guarantor. The CircuitCourt of Maury County granted summary judgment against t h e w i fe . We affirm.
I.

O n J uly 14, 1994, W illiam W . Hardison, Sr., president and sole stockholder

of Burt Brother Furniture Co., Inc. i n Columbia, re newed a noteon behalf of his company payable to theFirst Fa rmers & Merchants National Bank. The bank held Mr. Hard ison’s gua ranty and one signed b y his wife, Dorot hy M. Har dison, on June 9, 1989. The guar anties are i d entical except that Mr. Hardison s ecures the debts of Burt Brot hers and Mrs . Hardison’ s secures thedebts of her husband.

The first two paragraphs of Mrs. Hardi son’s guar anty state: FOR VALUE RECEIV ED and for the pur pose of enabling William W . Hardison, S r. of Colu mbia, TN (hereinafter

“Debtor”) , to obtain credit from FirstFarmers and Merchants N ational Bank of C olumbia, Tennessee, (hereinafter

called “bank

”), the under

signe d hereby gu ara ntees prompt payment at maturity , or at any other time thereafter, of

any and all indebte dness or obli gations upon whi ch Debtor now is or may

hereafter at any

ti m e becomeobligated o r bound to said bank either as principal or endorse r, w hether said obl igations ar ise by loans, overdraft, or

other extens ions of credits made by and with the consent of Debtor a nd we agree to pa y a ll costs and expenses incurred by said bank in en forcing this guaran ty, incl uding a reas onable attorney ’s fee. It is unders tood a nd agreed that this guaranty is and shall be continuing in na ture; that this guaranty guaranteesthe performance of all present an d future obligations

of Debtor; that no additional w riting or guaranty shall be required of guarantor at the time Debtor- 3 - incurs future o bligat ions; and that this guaranty will obligate guarantor on all future ob ligations of Debtor.
When Burt Brother

s defaulted on thenote, the bank sued the company and Mr. and Mr

s. Hardison . Mrs. H ardi son adm itted sign ing the 1989 g uaranty but asserted that her guar

anty covered only t hose obligat ions that Mr . Hardison i ncurred as a principal or endorser, notas a result of his own g uaranty. The court granted the bank’s motion for summary judg ment.
II.

We agree that t he l angu age of Mrs. H ardison’s g uaranty cov ers the obligations

of Mr. Hardison arising fro m his gu aranty of Burt Brothers’ debts. The guaranty is ver y broad in its terms. While the first p a ragraph does refer to Mr. Hardison’s liabilit

y as pri ncipal or endor ser, the second paragraph “ guarantees the performance of all presentand future oblig ations” of Mr . Hardison. In Tennessee the wordsof a guaranty

agreement are to be taken as strongl y against the guarantor a s the sense will admit. Hickory Springs Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Evans , 541 S.W.2d 97 (Tenn. 1976); Taylor v. Ross , 736 S.W.2d 614 (Tenn. App. 1987). Therefore, the guaranty covers the obligation Mr. Hardison now has to the bank as a resu lt of his own guara nty. There are no disputed issues of fact and thebank is en titled to a judgm ent a s a ma tter of la w.

W e affirm the judgm ent of the trial court and rem and this cause to the CircuitCourt of MauryCounty for any further proceedings

necessary . Tax the costs on appeal to Mr

s. Hardison .- 4 - _____________________________ BEN H. CAN TRELL, JUDGE CONCUR:

_______________________________ HENRY F . TODD, PRESID ING JUDGE MIDDLE SECTION

_______________________________ SAMUEL L. LEWIS, JUDGE