- 9 -
contained the same limitation on advances as in the
MMS/Huntington Loan; namely, advances could be made from
Huntington to petitioner, and from petitioner to MMS, only with
respect to a maximum of $250,000 to cover MMS's construction
costs for diagnostic facilities under contract. Pursuant to the
conditions imposed by Huntington in agreeing to restructure the
line of credit, the advances to petitioner under the
Miller/Huntington Loan were deposited into a restricted account
in petitioner's name for transfer to MMS. Similarly, when MMS
made a payment with respect to its obligation to petitioner under
the MMS/Miller Loan, such payment was required to be deposited by
petitioner into a restricted account and held in trust for
Huntington.
As security for the MMS/Miller Loan, MMS granted petitioner
a security interest in the same collateral that had secured the
MMS/Huntington Loan; namely, all of its assets, including
equipment, inventory, accounts receivable, etc. In the security
agreement for the Miller/Huntington Loan, petitioner made a
collateral assignment to Huntington of all of his rights under
the MMS/Miller Loan, including the promissory note executed in
his favor by MMS. With respect to the promissory note, the
Miller/Huntington Loan security agreement provided as follows:
Timothy J. Miller ("Debtor") * * * hereby grants,
pledges and assigns to The Huntington National Bank of
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011