United States District Court, D. New Jersey
S. ROSENZWEIG SILVERANG & DONOHOE LLC On behalf of
JOHN AZOTEA LEVINE STALLER SKLAR CHAN & BROWN PA On
behalf of Defendants
L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J.
matter concerns claims by Plaintiff, The Bancorp Bank,
regarding the default on the financing of a property in
Atlantic City, New Jersey that provides housing to veterans.
Presently before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for
summary judgment against Defendants Condor Developers, LLC
(“Condor”), NJG Acquisitions, LLC
(“NJG”) and Daniel Brown (“Brown”).
For the reasons expressed below, Plaintiff's motion will
be granted in part and continued in part.
2008, Defendants took over a 14-unit townhome project in
Atlantic City, New Jersey as housing for U.S. military
veterans. Due to various problems with construction and
damage from Super Storm Sandy in October 2012, Defendants
were unable to complete the project, even with increased
financing, and eventually defaulted on loans and lines of
credit extended by Plaintiff for principal in the amounts of
$5, 100, 000 and $950, 000, respectively.The defaulted
obligations were backed by personal guarantees executed by
NJG and Brown.
2015, Plaintiff instituted the instant foreclosure and breach
of contract action against Condor, NJG, and Brown. In
February 2016, the Court held a hearing on Plaintiff's
motion to appoint a receiver, and the Court granted that
motion. The receiver has been managing the property ever
has filed a motion for summary judgment in its favor on all
of its claims against Condor, NJG, and Brown, and on
Defendants' counterclaims against it, which include
claims for fraud in the inducement, breach of covenant of
good faith and fair dealing, intentional misrepresentation,
malicious prosecution, and unlawful permanent contract
and NJG do not contest that judgment be entered on
Plaintiff's claims against them. Brown, however, argues
that disputed issues of material fact remain over his
obligation under his personal guarantee. Brown admits that he
signed a guarantee on the line of credit, but denies that he
is individually liable. Brown claims that Plaintiff's
former vice president, Michael Schreiber, stated to Brown on
various occasions that the loans would be extended, and Brown
would not be held personally liable for the line of credit
upon any potential default because the bank would simply
repossess the property. Brown argues that this dispute also
compels the Court to deny Plaintiff's motion for summary
judgment on his counterclaims.
moving brief, Plaintiff argues that it is entitled to summary
judgment on Brown's counterclaims because he has not
provided any evidence to support his claims, including
failing to depose Michael Schreiber or any other bank
representative. Plaintiff argues that Brown's
self-serving testimony regarding Schreiber's alleged
fraud to induce Brown to sign a personal guarantee is
insufficient to maintain his counterclaims. Plaintiff,
however, did not file a reply brief in further support of its
motion to specifically counter Brown's argument that his
testimony presents a material disputed fact that precludes
Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on its breach of
contract claims against Brown.
Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1332 because there is complete diversity of
citizenship between the parties and the amount in controversy
exceeds $75, 000. The citizenship of the parties is as
follows: Plaintiff is a citizen of the State of Delaware, and
Defendants are citizens of the States of New York and New
Standard for ...