BMO Bank N.A. v. Bring Transport Inc, et al.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 10, 20251:24-cv-00809California5,270 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

22 Plaintiff filed its complaint on July 11, 2024. (ECF No. 1). It alleges that it entered into an 23 agreement concerning Defendant Transport’s (a commercial trucking company) purchase of 24 business equipment, resulting in a $126,433.60 loan to Transport with Defendant Bring (the 25 owner and CEO of Defendant Transport) guaranteeing the loan. (Id. at 2-3). In connection with 26 the loan, Defendant Transport granted Plaintiff a first-priority security interest in the equipment at 27 issue, “a 2023 CIMC 53’ Reefer . . .with 2022 Thermo King S600.” (Id. at 3). At the time of 28 filing the complaint, Plaintiff had not recovered the vehicle at issue. (Id. at 4). 1 Defendants defaulted under the terms of the agreement and guaranty by failing to make 2 loan payments. (Id. at 3-4). Plaintiff asserts that, under the terms that the parties agreed to, it is 3 owed interest, late fees, and attorney’s fees. (Id. at 4). It brings five “counts” (1) injunctive relief 4 generally concerning Defendants’ ability to access the equipment, including enjoining Defendants from using the equipment; (2) specific performance of Defendants’ obligations under the 5…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.