296 F. Supp. 3d 892
M.D. Tenn.2017Background
- Kryder (plaintiff) and Rogers (decedent/counter-plaintiff) executed promissory notes: $50,000 (Jan. 2010) and a consolidated $100,000 note (Apr. 16, 2010) that required 4% annual interest and security by deed of trust; principal due Dec. 31, 2020 and no acceleration clause.
- Rogers advanced funds (including $56,633.17 via frequent‑flyer credit) and Kryder made interest payments through Dec. 2011 but none thereafter.
- A January 11, 2010 fire damaged Kryder’s property; Kryder claims Rogers promised to reimburse fire losses and to credit rent/pasture fees against the note; Rogers allegedly agreed to advance funds and credit amounts against the note.
- Rogers was injured in 2012 and died in 2014; his daughter Etcheverry acted as attorney‑in‑fact, later substituted as Special Administrator of his estate and pursued counterclaims for breach and unjust enrichment.
- Procedural posture: lawsuit removed to federal court; Etcheverry moves for summary judgment. Court grants summary judgment for Etcheverry on all of Kryder’s claims and on Etcheverry’s breach‑of‑contract and equitable‑lien claims, denies summary judgment on unjust enrichment, and denies other counterclaims as moot.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Kryder) | Defendant's Argument (Etcheverry) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Kryder can prove claims (breach, good faith, quantum meruit, accounting, declaratory relief) that rely on oral offsets/credits against the Note | Rogers agreed to apply prepaid interest, credit monthly rent/pasture fees, and reimburse fire losses against the Note; Kryder will testify to these oral understandings | Evidence of oral transactions with decedent is inadmissible under Tenn. Dead Man's Statute; statute of limitations bars fire‑loss claims; pleadings and undisputed facts show Kryder stopped interest payments | Court: Kryder's claims fail—summary judgment for Etcheverry because admissible evidence lacking (Dead Man's Statute, SOL, and failure to produce admissible proof) |
| Whether Etcheverry properly accelerated the Note or breached duty of good faith by demand letters | Kryder: demand letters improperly accelerated the Note and exceeded power of attorney, breaching good faith | Demand letters sought payment or cure and did not clearly accelerate; Kryder breached by failing to pay interest (first‑to‑breach) and Tennessee law does not recognize tort remedy for bad‑faith performance separate from contract | Court: No improper acceleration causing claim for breach of good faith; summary judgment for Etcheverry on this theory |
| Whether Etcheverry (as estate) can enforce the Promissory Note (breach) | Kryder contends ambiguity about whether full $100,000 was advanced; argues amounts "to become outstanding" show conditional limits | Note is an unambiguous written promise to pay $100,000; Kryder drafted the Note; pleadings admit funds were advanced; Kryder failed to pay interest and deed of trust not recorded | Court: Etcheverry entitled to summary judgment on breach of contract for unpaid interest, attorney fees, and costs; equitable lien warranted to secure unpaid amounts |
| Whether unjust enrichment claim should be resolved on summary judgment | Kryder disputes amounts and characterizes certain transfers as rent offsets or gifts | Etcheverry asserts benefits were conferred and should be repaid; factual dispute exists as to character and amount of transfers | Court: Genuine dispute of material fact remains; summary judgment denied on unjust enrichment |
Key Cases Cited
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment standard and credibility not to be weighed at summary judgment)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (nonmovant must designate specific facts to show genuine issue for trial)
- Van Gorder v. Grand Trunk W. R.R., Inc., 509 F.3d 265 (summary judgment standards; construe inferences for nonmovant)
- Lovejoy Elecs., Inc. v. O'Berto, 873 F.2d 1001 (if only evidence is inadmissible under Dead Man's Statute, summary judgment may follow)
- Pero's Steak & Spaghetti House v. Lee, 90 S.W.3d 614 (Tenn. discovery rule; plaintiff charged when facts would put reasonable person on notice)
- Wallace v. Nat'l Bank of Commerce, 938 S.W.2d 684 (Tenn. law: no tort cause for breach of duty of good faith separate from contract)
- Greer v. Am. Sec. Ins. Co., 445 S.W.2d 904 (Tenn. law on equitable liens; equity may imply lien where parties intended property as security)