United States District Court, N.D. Illinois
September 29, 2004.
ECONOMIC STUDIES INC.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: PHILIP REINHARD, District Judge
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, Economic Studies, Inc., brings this breach of
contract action against defendant, Kenneth Ehredt, for
defendant's failure to pay under a personal guaranty agreement
("Guaranty Agreement") guaranteeing the obligations of Ehredt
Underground, Inc., to plaintiff. Jurisdiction is based on
diversity of citizenship. Plaintiff is a New York corporation
with it's principal place of business in New Jersey. Defendant is
a citizen of Illinois. The amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
Plaintiff has moved for summary judgment. Defendant has elected
not to file a response to plaintiff's LR 56.1 (a) statement of
undisputed facts so those facts are deemed admitted. LR 56.1 (b)
(3) (B). Defendant has also chosen not to file a memorandum of
law in opposition to plaintiff's summary judgment motion.
Summary judgment is proper where "the pleadings, depositions,
answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file together with
the affidavits, if any, show there is no genuine issue as to any
material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment
as a matter of law." Fed.R. Civ. P. 56 (c). Taking the facts as
admitted, plaintiff entered into a contract with Ehredt
Underground, Inc. ("Underground") in 1992 to provide certain
consulting services in relation to an action by defendant against
Commonwealth Edison Company and the International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers, Local No. 196. In 1995, defendant executed
the Guaranty Agreement guaranteeing the obligations then due
plaintiff from Underground and for future obligations to be
incurred. The consideration for the Guaranty Agreement was the
services that "have been and will be performed" by plaintiff. In
March, 1998, defendant individually and on behalf of Underground
countersigned a letter agreeing to the entry of a confession of
judgment against them in the amount of $93,426.72. Defendant did
not execute the confession of judgment as agreed. Pursuant to the
Guaranty Agreement, defendant agreed to pay interest at an annual
rate of 12% compounded monthly on unpaid balances and to pay
attorneys' fees in the amount of 25% of the principal and
interest then due if an attorney was used to enforce the Guaranty
Agreement. Defendant has not paid as agreed and the sum of
$218,524.88, principal and interest, was due as of 6/7/04. With
per diem interest of $35.92, accrued interest from 6/7/04 through
9/28/04 is $4058.96. Combined principal and interest as of
9/28/04 is $222,583.84. Adding the attorneys' fees, the total
amount due as of 9/28/04 is $278,229.80.
The undisputed facts establish the existence of a contract to
guarantee a debt and its breach. The undisputed facts show the
balance due under the Guaranty Agreement. Defendant has offered
no argument to defeat the plaintiff's summary judgment motion. In
the absence of any reason being offered by defendant to show that
the facts are not as established by plaintiff or that there is
any legal reason why the relief sought should not be granted,
plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is granted.
For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff's motion for summary
judgment is granted. Judgment is entered in favor of plaintiff
and against defendant in the sum of $278,229.80.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.