Monday, March 30, 2009 by Bose McKinney Evans
Richard Moore appeals from the trial court’s judgment in favor of Wells Fargo Construction (“Wells Fargo”), formerly known as The CIT Group/Equipment Financing, Inc. (“CIT”), on its complaint to recover a deficiency owed under a personal guaranty. Moore raises two issues for review:
1. Whether the evidence is sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that Wells Fargo conducted the sale of a repossessed excavator in a commercially reasonable fashion.
2. Whether Wells Fargo provided adequate notice to Moore of the sale of the excavator.
Conclusion (slip op. at 15): Affirmed.
Key Analysis (slip op. at 11, 14-15): We agree with Moore that I.C. 26-1-9.1-610 requires sales such as the instant one to be commercially reasonable. But the plain language of the Guaranty shows that Moore intended to waive any claim regarding the commercial reasonableness of a sale of the Excavator. Thus, under the Guaranty, Moore has waived that claim . . . We conclude that the Second Notice, containing the web address of the auction and the physical address of the auction company, satisfies the location requirement in I.C. 26-1-9.1-613(1)(E). As such, Moore’s argument that the Second Notice was inadequate must fail.