The plaintiff brought a motion for summary judgment seeking repayment of a $400,000 loan advanced for the production of a film.
The borrower and guarantor argued that a separate agreement governing distribution of film revenues subordinated repayment of the loan until other liabilities were satisfied and effectively transformed the loan into a risk investment.
The court held that the loan agreement and promissory note clearly provided that the loan was payable on demand and were not modified by the revenue-sharing agreement.
The defendants’ interpretation would contradict the express contractual language and render the loan agreement meaningless.
Summary judgment was granted for the full loan amount plus interest.
