Court Opinion

ID: 9585576
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 23:01:47.423895+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:59.075099
License: Public Domain

Judge WELLS
dissenting in part and concurring in part:
I do not read the requirements of G.S. 1A-1, Rule 56(e) to place the burden on the defendant to set forth specific facts with *695respect to his contention that he did not have any knowledge of having executed the guaranty agreement. His affidavit contains the following statement:
As to the guarantee which purports to bear my signature, I deny having any knowledge of ever having executed such a guarantee. Based upon the copies which I have seen, I am unable to state that it is my signature and, therefore, I deny it.
Defendant’s affidavit also contains a denial of the sales to the corporate defendant and a lack of knowledge of payments and credits.
It seems to me that the defendant, in his affidavit, has set forth a sufficient basis to raise genuine issues for trial as to whether he in fact signed the guaranty agreement or whether it was signed by someone else with his permission and on his behalf; and whether the sales detailed in plaintiff’s affidavit were in fact made and not paid for.
I concur with the majority that summary judgment for defendant was not appropriate; but it is my opinion that neither is summary judgment for plaintiff appropriate, and that the cause should be remanded for trial on the issues of fact I have enumerated above.