HomeMy WebLinkAbout1543 •
~ ~ ~ r~. • i~ 3 ~
. . ~9~~s~~
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT Ol~' THE
NIIdETEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
. IN AND ~'OR ST. LUCiE COUNTY,
FLORIDA. '
. ~ NO. 69-430
CiTIZENS BANK OF PALM BEACH ) _
COUNTY, a Florida Banldng ) ~ -
~ospor,ation, ~ , ) . _
Plaintiff, ) '
. ~
vs. ) ~
~ ~ ) -
G. C. ~HOMAS, JR. and GYrTITH )
THOMAS; his wife, ~individually, ) . '
G. C. THOMA.S, JR. and DONALD E. ) _ -
RAULERSON doing businesa as TE,R ) .
SPREADER SERVICE, and T&R ) - . - ;
SPREADER SERYICE, INC. , A )
Florida corporation. ~ )
Defendant~ ) .
. -
DEFYCIENCY JUDGMENT
This cause came on to be heard on the Motion of the Plaintiff for a .
Deficiency Judgment and the anawer of the Defendant, Dona.ld E. Rauler son,
and the court having mnsidered the -evidenoe and ha`ang heard aigument of ~ ~
counsel, and beiag fully advised in the prernises, it appears that:
. This is a suit to foreclose seven security aigreements upon personal .
property. A Final Judgment of Foreclosuxe was entered against ali De-
fendants on Jan. 27, 1970, - and the two lots of _seaured property not pre-
viously sold pursuant to stipulation were sold by the Clerk and bid in by
thePlaintiff. The Motion for Deficiency Judgmeat followed against all ~ '
Defendants but only the Defendant Donald E. Raulerson made an active
defens~, As he claimed he had never had au opportunity to litigate his coa-
tention that he is not persona.lly liable, he was permitted to file an Answer
to the Motion and was given his day in court upon tlie issues raised thereia.
The gist of the defense is twofold; prin~arily Raulerson claims that
he was released from personal liability by ve~ oal agreement and th~ actions
of the Plaintiff bank. Secoadly, he claime that ~he secured property wae
sold for less that its fair value. _ Although he stipulated through Counael
to the private sale of five of the chattels, lie aontends that he agreed to
their sale at any iaadequate price only because he believed he had no ~
liability with regard ta tliem.
Easentially theae are factual matters and the Court heard testi- -
mony of ten witnessea. As is usual, the evidence is conflicting .and im-
possible to reconcile. As trier of fact, the Couzt finds that the Defen-
dants R.aulerson failed to establiah facta that would release him fmm
personal liability or that the property was sold for lese thaa its fair value.
Accordiagly, itiis: , -
. . ~ ~185 ~i544
. ~ eao~ bc~ ea~15~i
Circuit Ct Mia. ~
_ -