Branch Banking & Trust Company v. Paul Meng, et al, No. 14-15278 (11th Cir. 2015)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 14-15278 Date Filed: 04/14/2015 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 14-15278 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cv-04179-TCB BRANCH BANKING & TRUST COMPANY, as successor-in-interest to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Receiver for Colonial Bank, Plaintiff-Counter Defendant-Appellee, versus PAUL MENG, LANCE T. GAUDE, DOUGLAS R. ADAMS, PARKSIDE RESIDENTIAL, LLC, SCENIC HOLDINGS, INC., NORTHBRIDGE HOMES, LLC, CREEKWOOD HOMES, INC., STRONG ROCK HOLDINGS, INC., DODSON WOODS, LLC, Defendants-Counter Claimants-Appellants. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia ________________________ (April 14, 2015) Case: 14-15278 Date Filed: 04/14/2015 Page: 2 of 2 Before HULL, ROSENBAUM and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This appeal involves the amount of damages due in a multi-million dollar default of various promissory notes and guaranties involving real property in Georgia. The district court granted Branch Banking & Trust Company’s (BB&T) unopposed motion for summary judgment and awarded damages totaling $8,416,147.82. The defendant-appellants do not challenge the district court’s conclusion that they were in default or the total calculation of damages. Rather, the only issue on appeal is whether the district court’s order fails to assign the amount of damages due from each defendant. The parties agree that the district court’s order sets out the amount of damages due on each of the defaulted loans but that it does not identify which defendant owed those amounts. Our review confirms that the district court’s order should be more precise. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment but remand for the limited purpose of correcting the judgment to indicate the specific amount of damages for which each defendant is responsible. AFFIRMED in part and REMANDED in part. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.