Justice Yvonne Lewis
Plaintiff moved for a post-trial judgment, or judgment notwithstanding the verdict, seeking a verdict in its favor in this action for breach of a guaranty against defendant. Plaintiff alleged defendant personally guaranteed the debt obligations of Pacific Plumbing & Heating, and when Pacific failed to remit payment for supplies sold, defendant also failed to make payments to satisfy Pacific’s debt despite demands for payment. The parties moved for summary judgment on liability. A prior court denied both motion, and the issue at trial was whether the guaranty agreement signed by defendant was effective. The court found that upon testimony and evidence presented at trial, plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence showing it extended credit to Pacific in reliance on defendant’s guaranty. It stated defendant demonstrated the grant of credit to Pacific was in reliance on an application made by Pacific’s principal and not in reliance on defendant’s guaranty. The court concluded as the evidence indicated the credit was not extended to Pacific in reliance on defendant’s application, the guaranty lacked consideration and was not effective. Hence, plaintiff’s post-judgment motion to set aside the verdict and enter a verdict in its favor was denied.
