Bank of Heflin, Heflin, Ala. v. Landmark Inns of America, Inc.

Decision Date10 October 1979
Docket NumberNo. 77-2151,77-2151
Citation604 F.2d 354
PartiesBANK OF HEFLIN, HEFLIN, ALABAMA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LANDMARK INNS OF AMERICA, INC., etc., et al., Defendants, Charles W. Luedtke, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

R. Avon Buice, Warner Robins, Ga., for defendant-appellant.

John S. Casey, Heflin, Ala., for plaintiff-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.

Before TJOFLAT and VANCE, Circuit Judges, ALLGOOD, District Judge. *

VANCE, Circuit Judge:

Defendant, Charles W. Luedtke, appeals a summary judgment in which the plaintiff bank was awarded $25,000.00 plus interest and attorneys fees.

In March 1974 appellant and his codefendant, William G. Kinsey, each owned fifty percent of the common stock of codefendant, Landmark Inns of America, Inc. On behalf of the corporate defendant, Kinsey obtained a $75,000.00 line of credit from the Exchange Bank of Montgomery, Alabama. He gave the corporation's notes to the bank in the amount of $50,000.00 on March 14, 1974, and $25,000.00 on April 23, 1974. By April 4, 1974, the bank had received personal guarantees for the entire $75,000.00 purportedly executed by the two principals, Kinsey and Luedtke. The proceeds of the $25,000.00 note were credited to Landmark's account, and Exchange Bank sold that note without recourse to the plaintiff bank.

On July 20, 1974, defendants Kinsey and Luedtke sold all of the outstanding capital stock of the corporate defendant to Larco Enterprises, Inc. and Allan J. Larson. Paragraph 11 of the written sales agreement between the parties to that transaction provided in part,

Buyers and Larson have notice of the indebtedness of Landmark Inns of America, Inc. to (1) Exchange National Bank, Montgomery, Alabama, which indebtedness has been endorsed and/or personally guaranteed by Sellers in the original principal sum of $75,000.00; . . .; and Buyer and Larson shall hold Sellers harmless from the payment of such guarantees and/or personal endorsements, and shall make such payments . . . so that no payment of such debts may be enforced against sellers personally.

In September 1974 the new purchasers failed to make the payments in accordance with this provision. Exchange Bank then sued defendants for nonpayment of the $50,000.00 note which it held, and plaintiff bank filed this suit against defendants on the $25,000.00 note which it had purchased.

Several months later Kinsey and Luedtke sued Larco Enterprises, Inc. and Larson in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee for several breaches of their July 20, 1974, agreement, including their nonpayment of the $75,000.00 indebtedness specified in paragraph 11. On motion for default judgment a hearing was held at which Luedtke testified in support of the motion. Based on his testimony and other evidence the court awarded judgment to defendant Kinsey in the amount of $132,963.81 and to appellant in the amount of $152,839.01. These awards included damages for the buyers' nonpayment of the $75,000.00 notes to Exchange Bank.

Exchange Bank's suit against Luedtke and Kinsey was tried in February 1976. Appellant denied indebtedness under the guarantee. The district court, however, entered judgment for Exchange Bank holding that Luedtke was collaterally estopped from claiming that he did not execute the guarantee or denying that he guaranteed payment of the $75,000.00 because he had obtained a judgment on that indebtedness in the federal district court in Tennessee. 1 On appeal, the district court's holding was affirmed without opinion by this court. Exchange National Bank v. Landmark Inns of America, Inc., 549 F.2d 201 (5th Cir. 1977).

In this action, filed by Bank of Heflin on the $25,000 note, Luedtke again denied that he was indebted under the guarantee. Before the same district court that had tried the Exchange Bank case, he alleged that he did not sign the guarantee and that the guarantee is, therefore, a forgery. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Bank of Heflin. On appeal, both parties argue the applicability of collateral estoppel under the facts presented to the district court.

"Collateral estoppel precludes a party from relitigating an issue of ultimate fact that has already been decided in a prior adjudication" In re Merrill, 594 F.2d 1064, 1067 (5th Cir. 1979). In the Exchange Bank case, the issue of Luedtke's indebtedness under the guarantee was fully litigated, and the court found that "the defenses against the claim of the plaintiff are not supported by the evidence, and the plaintiff is entitled to recover from the defendants Kinsey and Luedtke."

Bank of Heflin was not a party to the Exchange Bank action, and Luedtke argues that it cannot...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • In re Kilroy
    • United States
    • United States Bankruptcy Courts. Fifth Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Southern District of Texas
    • December 18, 2006
    ...Logan v. McDaniel, 21 S.W.3d 683, 689 (Tex.App. — Austin 2000 pet. denied)); see also Bank of Heflin, Heflin, Ala. v. Landmark Inns of America, Inc., 604 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.1979) (holding that where the maker had been found liable on the guaranty in a prior action, the bank could assert offe......
  • Cotton States Mut. Ins. Co. v. Anderson
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • December 26, 1984
    ...... Bank of Heflin v. Landmark Inns, 604 F.2d 354 (5th ... from [the] statute." High Ol' Times, Inc. v. Busbee, 673 F.2d 1225, 1228 (11th Cir.1982). ......
  • Teledyne Industries, Inc. v. N.L.R.B.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • August 23, 1990
    ...protects the court only in cases where the party is taking the same position on the same issue. But see Bank of Heflin v. Landmark Inns of America, Inc., 604 F.2d 354 (5th Cir.1979) (applies collateral estoppel in this situation, although the cited authority concerns judicial estoppel). In ......
  • Rufenacht v. Iowa Beef Processors, Inc.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • September 17, 1981
    ...it had previously been found in a suit by the widow of another individual killed in the same shooting. In Bank of Heflin v. Landmark Inns of America, 604 F.2d 354 (5th Cir., 1979) suit was filed by the plaintiff bank against a guarantor of a note who was held estopped from denying indebtedn......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT