- 24 -
two of which were signed by Mr. McDaniel as a general partner of
Second Street and the last of which was signed by him individu-
ally, permitted the Bank to extend the time of payment under that
note. The express terms of Mr. McDaniel's guaranty provide that
his obligations as a guarantor of the 1989 note are to be unaf-
fected by, inter alia, the Bank's extension of the time of
payment of that note.
Moreover, under Florida law, the extension of the time for
payment of a loan is not a material alteration of the terms of
the loan. In Anderson v. Trade Winds Enters. Corp., 241 So. 2d
174, 178 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1970), the District Court of Appeal
for the Fourth District of Florida stated:
The individual appellees' answers plead that their
liability as guarantors was discharged by extensions of
time for payment which the holder of the note accorded
the maker. The evidence indicates that the note went
into default when the first installment was due.
Thereafter, instead of bringing immediate suit on the
note, partial payments were accepted. The evidence
does not indicate, however, that the holder and maker
of the note legally modified the latter's obligation
under the note. The extensions of time were gratuitous
indulgences to avoid litigation. Such extensions,
therefore, did not affect the guarantors' rights
against the maker of the note and, therefore, did not
discharge their liability as guarantors. * * *
In the instant case, the decision by NationsBank/Amresco not to
notify Second Street in writing that the 1989 note was in default
until about a year after Second Street failed to make the balloon
payment that was due on April 12, 1993, did not constitute a
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011