defendants made periodic payments for roughly two years.
As each defendant made a payment, Continental made a corresponding reduction in that defendant's limit of liability. By January 1, 1990, defendants had stopped making payments altogether. Crediting defendants with the payments made prior to that date, Continental has determined that Robinson Everett is liable for $ 1,546,548.29, Kathrine Everett is liable for $ 1,546,543.51, and J.H. Froelich is liable for $ 561,913.68. As of April 10, 1991 -- the cutoff date used by Continental in submitting its damage calculations -- interest continues to accrue at a rate of $ 435.59 per day for Robinson and Kathrine Everett, and $ 159.36 per day for J.H. Froelich.
Continental's calculations, which are based on a straightforward application of the guaranties, appear to accurately reflect its actual damages. The defendants disagree. They contend that the loan payments should have been applied against the balance of the underlying loan, rather than their respective guaranty limits. Under defendants' approach, the principal of the loan is reduced by the payments made by all of the guarantors, and interest is then determined according to each defendant's pro rata share
of the outstanding loan balance.
Defendants' method of calculation, as Continental points out, is inconsistent with the terms of the guaranty agreements. There is nothing to suggest, in the guaranties or the underlying loan documents, that interest is to be based on the guarantors' pro rata shares of the loan. On the contrary, the guaranties provide, in unambiguous terms, that defendants are liable for the stated limits of liability "plus interest on such amounts." Id. § 1 (emphasis added). Each defendant's liability is "independent of any other guaranties . . . [and] may be enforced in full regardless of the existence of any such other guaranties." Id. § 8(d). This language clearly demonstrates that payments made by one guarantor do not serve to reduce another's liability. Continental properly calculated defendant's liability for principal and interest.
Having considered all of the parties' submissions, including their briefs, supporting affidavits, and exhibits, the court finds that there is no genuine issue of material fact with respect to the principal and interest due under the loan. The court hereby enters judgment in favor of Continental and against defendant Robinson Everett in the amount of $ 1,546,548.29, against Kathrine Everett in the amount of $ 1,546,543.51, and against J.H. Froelich in the amount of $ 561,913.68. Robinson and Kathrine Everett are also liable for interest accruing at a rate of $ 435.59 per day, and J.H. Froelich must pay interest at a rate of $ 159.36 per day.
Finally, defendants cannot dispute that Continental is entitled to attorneys' fees and expenses incurred in connection with the enforcement of the guaranties. See id. § 1. The only question in this regard is whether or not the amount of recoverable fees and costs must be determined prior to the entry of final judgment. Continental, over defendants' objection, has requested that fees and costs be assessed after judgment is entered. The court does not find this request unreasonable. The finality of the judgment is not impaired simply because the total amount of fees and costs has not yet been determined. Barrington Press, Inc. v. Morey, 816 F.2d 341, 342 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 906, 98 L. Ed. 2d 207, 108 S. Ct. 249 (1987). The determination of the total fees and costs may be properly resolved in a postjudgment proceeding. See id. at 344 (Ripple, J., concurring). Any objection defendants may have to Continental's petition for fees and costs shall be made at that time.
IT IS SO ORDERED.