The Medds admitted they signed the documents on which this suit is based. (Pl.'s Mot. Summ. J. Ex. 2-C; Ex. 2-D; Ex. 2-E; Ex. 2-F; Ex. 3, R. Medd Dep. 76:9-19, 77:21-78:1-4, 78:22-79:1-4, 79:16-80:1, 80:11-20, May 23, 2011; Ex. 4, C. Medd Dep. 28:7-14, 29:12-18, 33:2-11, May 23, 2011.) When the value of the pledged collateral, an investment account, fell below the required minimum amount, Citibank made a demand on the Medds for the difference between the outstanding debt and the investment account, $2,790,720.84. (Id. Ex. 2-H.) Randall Medd testified he was unable to come up with the money in the time allotted by Citibank. (Id. R. Medd Dep. 89:19-91:1.) Shortly thereafter, Citibank notified the Medds the entire amount of the credit facility plus unpaid interest was due; Citibank also reminded the Medds it was entitled to liquidate the collateral to satisfy the amount due. (Id. Ex. 2-I.) Citibank did liquidate the investment account, receiving $5,622.496.74 in proceeds to apply to the total outstanding principal amount of $8,000,000 and interest that continues to accrue each day in the amount of $478.80. (Id. Ex. 2, Catallo Aff. ¶ 18.) As of June 10, 2011, when Citibank's motion for summary judgment was filed, the accumulated, unpaid interest amounted to $228,238.94, for a total amount of principal and interest due of $2,605,742.20. (Id.) As of the same date, Randall Medd owed $250,000 in principal on the letter of credit, plus accrued, unpaid interest (at the rate of $22.56 per day) of $11,133.51, for a total amount of principal and interest due of $261,133.51. (Id. ¶ 19.) Citibank has not been paid these sums of money. (Id. ¶ 20.)
Citibank has established a clear entitlement to the amounts it has claimed due, and the Medds have offered nothing in their defense. Therefore, a separate order will be issued granting Citibank's motion for summary judgment.