SW Loan A, L.P. v. Anibal J. Duarte-Viera, Antonio P. Pardo and Edward M. Reiss, 04-15-00255-CV

Borrower executed a $10,000,000 Note secured by deed of trust and rents; guarantors signed Limited Guaranties capped at $2.5M.
Note assigned to SW Loan A, L.P. in Dec 2011; default asserted for unpaid property taxes.
Lender agreed to pay property taxes under a May 2011 modification/escrow arrangement; assignment occurred during this period.
Appellant foreclosed on Nov 6, 2012 and claimed a deficiency; Guarantors prevailed at trial after jury verdict.
Post-trial motions were denied; final judgment entered in favor of Guarantors; appellate briefing by Guarantors argues lack of admissible proof and insufficient evidence.
Jury asked for key documents (Note, Notice of Assignment, calculations) which were not admitted into evidence, supporting Guarantors’ challenge to proof against them.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Amount due on the Note at foreclosure proved?	SW Loan A. contends amount due proved by calculations.	Duarte-Viera et al. argue no admissible calculations or Note admitted.	No; insufficient proof of amount due.
There was a default?	SW Loan A. asserts default based on tax payments.	Guarantors contend lender owed taxes under DX 1 and thus no borrower default.	Reasonable jury could find no default.
Sufficiency of evidence supports take-nothing verdict?	SW Loan A. relied on damages and Note; proofs incomplete.	Guarantors show lack of personal knowledge and inconsistent damages.	Yes; evidence legally and factually sufficient for take-nothing verdict.
Attorney’s fees award under Declaratory Judgment Act	N/A treated as appellees’ support for award.	N/A argues discretion; fees appropriate.	Trial court acted within discretion; affirm.

Town North Nat’l Bank v. Broaddus, 569 S.W.2d 489 (Tex. 1978) (parol evidence limits; post-execution conduct may modify terms)
Carruth Mortgage Corp. v. Ford, 630 S.W.2d 897 (Tex. App. -- Houston [1st Dist.] 1982) (must prove amount due on note at foreclosure for deficiency)
Williams v. Henderson, 580 S.W.2d 37 (Tex. Civ. App. -- Houston [1st Dist.], 1979) (failure to prove amount due defeats deficiency claim)
Glauser v. State Farm Life Ins. Co., 1994 Tex. App. LEXIS 2198 (Tex. App. -- Houston [1st Dist.] 1994) (parol evidence allowed to show post-signature releases; not fully admitted here)
Bocquet v. Herring, 972 S.W.2d 19 (Tex. 1998) (attorney’s fees decisions under Declaratory Judgment Act reviewed for reasonableness and necessity)
Sterner v. Marathon Oil Co., 767 S.W.2d 686 (Tex. 1989) (legal sufficiency standard for appellate review)
City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (standard for legal sufficiency; great weight of evidence)
Oake v. Collin County, 692 S.W.2d 454 (Tex. 1985) (evidentiary standards governing proof of facts)
Sava Gumarska in Kemijska Industria D.D. v. Advanced Polymer Scis., Inc., 128 S.W.3d 304 (Tex. App. -- Dallas 2004) (attorney’s fees and declaratory relief considerations)