Free Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

C I T I C A P I T A L T E C H N O L O G Y) FINANCE, INC., formerly known as EAB) Leasing Corp., a Pennsylvania corporation,) and CITICAPITAL COMMERCIAL) LEASING CORPORATION, formerly) known as Associates Leasing, Inc., an) Indiana corporation, predecessor in interest) to real party in interest, GENERAL) ELECTRIC CAPITAL CORPORATION,) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ) GRANT H. GOODMAN AND TERI B.) ) GOODMAN, husband and wife, ) ) Defendants. )

No. CV 03-01587-PHX-JAT FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

On June 20, 21, and 28, the Court presided over the bench trial in this matter. In their 20 complaint, Plaintiffs CitiCapital Technology Finance, Inc. ("CitiCapital Technology") and 21 22 Defendants Grant and Teri Goodman owed deficiencies due under eight lease agreements 23 following the default of those lease agreements and the subsequent sale of the leased 24 equipment. Plaintiffs seek liquidated damages and attorney's fees. Following the bench 25 trial, the Court hereby finds and concludes as follows: 26 27 28 General Electric Capital Corporation was substituted for CitiCapital Commercial Leasing Corporation upon written motion of its counsel.
Case 2:03-cv-01587-JAT Document 88 Filed 07/21/2006 Page 1 of 15
1

CitiCapital Commercial Leasing Corporation1 ("CitiCapital Commercial") asserted that

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

I.

FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Plaintiff CitiCapital Technology is incorporated in Pennsylvania and has its principal place of business in New York. Plaintiff General Electric Capital Corporation ("GE") is incorporated in Delaware and has its principal place of business in Connecticut. Defendants Grant and Teri Goodman are both residents and citizens of Arizona. 2. Under an agreement designated as Lease No. 005-0515121-000 ("Lease No. 121"), executed by GTI Capital Holdings, L.L.C., dba Rockland Materials ("GTI"), and thereafter executed by U.S. Bancorp Leasing and Financial ("USB"), USB financed GTI's acquisition of certain equipment in exchange for GTI's promise to make sixty monthly payments in the amount of $3,503.18. 3. Under an agreement designated as Lease No. 005-0515122-000 ("Lease No. 122"), executed by GTI, and thereafter executed by USB, USB financed GTI's acquisition of certain equipment in exchange for GTI's promise to make thirtysix monthly payments in the amount of $3,550.14. 4. Under Lease Nos. 121 and 122, GTI agreed to lease from USB the following described personal property: LEASE NO. 121 LEASED EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION Four (4) 2001 Benson 27' Aluminum Dump Trailers VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION # 5DMDSABD01M000216 5DMDSABD21M000217 5DMDSABD41M000218 5DMDSABD61M000219 1XKDDE9X2TJ723029 1XKDDE9X0TJ723031 1XKDDE9XXTJ723473 1XKDDE9X1TJ723474

20 21 22 23 24 5. 25 26 122

Four (4) 1996 Kenworth T800 Tractors

Defendant Grant Goodman, a principal and member of GTI, guarantied Lease Nos. 121 and 122 (the "Grant Goodman Guaranty of Lease Nos. 121 and 122"). By executing said guaranty, Defendant Grant Goodman guarantied all payments,

27 28
Case 2:03-cv-01587-JAT Document 88

-2Filed 07/21/2006 Page 2 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 9. 8. 7. 6.

charges, and obligations due under Lease Nos. 121 and 122. USB assigned Lease No. 121, the Lease No. 121 equipment, and the Grant Goodman Guaranty of Lease No. 121 to CitiCapital Technology. CitiCapital Technology is the owner and holder of Lease No. 121, the Lease No. 121 equipment, and the Grant Goodman Guaranty of Lease No. 121. USB assigned Lease No. 122, the Lease No. 122 equipment, and the Grant Goodman Guaranty of Lease No. 122 to CitiCapital Technology. CitiCapital Technology is the owner and holder of Lease No. 122, the Lease No. 122 equipment, and the Grant Goodman Guaranty of Lease No. 122. Lease Nos. 121 and 122 went into default for the failure to pay monthly rent due in April, 2003. Lease Nos. 121 and 122 remain in default. Pursuant to the terms of Lease Nos. 121 and 122, upon default CitiCapital Technology is entitled to immediate possession of the equipment included in Lease Nos. 121 and 122 and is entitled to sell or otherwise dispose of it. CitiCapital Technology is also entitled to apply the proceeds of any such disposition to the indebtedness of GTI to CitiCapital Technology. 10. In the case of In re: GTI Capital Holdings, L.L.C./G.H. Goodman Investment Companies, L.L.C., pending in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Arizona, Case Nos. 2-03-07923 through 2-03-7924 (the "GTI bankruptcy case"), the court entered an Order that authorized CitiCapital Technology's recovery of the equipment included in Lease Nos. 121 and 122. After repossessing the equipment, CitiCapital Technology provided notice to all parties of the sale of the Lease No. 121 and the Lease No. 122 equipment. 11. CitiCapital Technology and Nationwide Auction entered into an agreement in which Nationwide Auction agreed to assist in the sale of CitiCapital Technology's repossessed equipment. Pursuant to this agreement, Nationwide Auction provided a site on which to hold the public auction sales and also -3Case 2:03-cv-01587-JAT Document 88 Filed 07/21/2006 Page 3 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

assisted in marketing the sales. 12. In order to hold a successful public auction sale, CitiCapital Technology, in conjunction with Nationwide Auction, marketed the equipment included in Lease Nos. 121 and 122. At least ten days prior to the sale, they sent out 5,000 to 10,000 brochures, which listed the inventory being sold at the upcoming sale. At least two weeks prior to the sale, they provided Internet access to information about equipment being sold and also sent e-mails to 35,000-50,000 target customers. Additionally, at least two weeks prior to the sale, they advertised the sale in a publication known as "Truck Paper," which has a nationwide circulation of 700,000 people. Also, Roger Doyle, an employee of CitiCapital Technology, called 50-100 potential buyers to notify them of the upcoming sale. 13. After extensive marketing of the Lease No. 121 equipment, one 2001 Benson 27' Aluminum Dump Trailer was sold at public auction in Ontario, California, a recognized market for the sale of construction equipment. The balance of the Lease No. 121 equipment was sold by private sale. The date and gross amount received from said sales is set forth below: LEASED EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION One (1) 2001 Benson 27' Aluminum Dump Trailer One (1) 2001 Benson 27' Aluminum Dump Trailer One (1) 2001 Benson 27' Aluminum Dump Trailer One (1) 2001 Benson 27' Aluminum Dump Trailer VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION # 5DMDSABD01M000216 5DMDSABD21M000217 5DMDSABD41M000218 5DMDSABD61M000219 SALE PRICE AND DATE $21,000 2/23/04 $21,000 2/23/04 $21,000 2/23/04 $12,500 2/23/04

14. After extensive marketing of the Lease No. 122 equipment, it was sold at public 25 auction in Ontario, California. The date and gross amount received from the 26 public auction is set forth below: 27 28
Case 2:03-cv-01587-JAT Document 88

-4Filed 07/21/2006 Page 4 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Case 2:03-cv-01587-JAT Document 88

LEASED EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION One (1) 1996 Kenworth T800 Tractor One (1) 1996 Kenworth T800 Tractor One (1) 1996 Kenworth T800 Tractor One (1) 1996 Kenworth T800 Tractor

VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION # 1XKDDE9X2TJ723029 1XKDDE9X0TJ723031 1XKDDE9XXTJ723473 1XKDDE9X1TJ723474

SALE PRICE AND DATE $11,500 2/10/04 $5,750 2/10/04 $5,500 2/10/04 $6,500 2/10/04

15. CitiCapital Technology properly calculated its damages under the express provisions of Lease Nos. 121 and 122. It properly discounted future rents to present value. Additionally, it properly credited all payments made and properly credited all net sale proceeds from the disposition of the equipment included in Lease Nos. 121 and 122. 16. Under the express provisions of Lease Nos. 121 and 122, GTI agreed to pay CitiCapital Technology its reasonable attorney's fees, as well as all other expenses incurred by CitiCapital Technology in connection with the enforcement of any of its remedies. 17. Under an agreement designated as Lease No. 005-0515468-000 ("Lease No. 468"), executed by GTI, and thereafter executed by CitiCapital Technology, CitiCapital Technology financed GTI's acquisition of certain equipment in exchange for GTI's promise to make sixty monthly payments in the amount of $5,079.68. 18. Under an agreement designated as Lease No. 005-0515548-000 ("Lease No. 548"), executed by GTI, and thereafter executed by CitiCapital Technology, CitiCapital Technology financed GTI's acquisition of certain equipment in exchange for GTI's promise to make fifty-four monthly payments in the amount -5Filed 07/21/2006 Page 5 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 468 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 548

of $2,120.00. 19. Defendant Grant Goodman guarantied Lease Nos. 468 and 548 (the "Grant Goodman Guaranty of Lease Nos. 468 and 548"). By executing said guaranty, Defendant Grant Goodman guarantied all payments, charges, and obligations due under Lease Nos. 468 and 548. 20. Under Lease Nos. 468 and 548, GTI agreed to lease from CitiCapital Technology the following described personal property: LEASE NO. LEASED EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION Two (2) 2000 Peterbilt Trucks W/MTM 11 YD Bridgemaster V Mixer VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION # INPAL00X1YD493161 W/58419-15606 INPAL00X3YD493162 W/57170-16029

Invoice #020969 One (1) Vince Hagan Model VH-10945P Free Standing Jet Pulse Dust Conveyor with baby-buggy style dust shroud, ducting and dust recycle system Invoice #020970 One (1) 5" Fill Pipe in lieu of a 4" Fill Pipe as quoted Two (2) additional 5" Fill Pipes Invoice #OR00821C1 One (1) Vince Hagan Model 3200BAL Elevated Silo with VH24SJP and 14" Screw Conveyor One (1) Silo Work Platform Option

21. Lease Nos. 468 and 548 went into default for the failure to pay the monthly rent due in April, 2003. Lease Nos. 468 and 548 remain in default. 22. Pursuant to the terms of Lease Nos. 468 and 548, upon default CitiCapital Technology is entitled to immediate possession of the equipment included in Lease Nos. 468 and 548 and is entitled to sell or otherwise dispose of it. CitiCapital Technology is also entitled to apply the proceeds of any such disposition to the indebtedness of GTI to CitiCapital Technology. 23. In the GTI bankruptcy case, the court entered an Order that authorized -6Case 2:03-cv-01587-JAT Document 88 Filed 07/21/2006 Page 6 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

CitiCapital Technology's recovery of the equipment included in Lease Nos. 468 and 548. After repossessing the equipment, CitiCapital Technology provided notice to all parties of the sale of the Lease No. 468 and the Lease No. 548 equipment. 24. In order to hold a successful public auction sale, CitiCapital Technology, in conjunction with Nationwide Auction, marketed the equipment included in Lease Nos. 468 and 548. At least ten days prior to the sale, they sent out 5,000 to 10,000 brochures, which listed the inventory being sold at the upcoming sale. At least two weeks prior to the sale, they provided Internet access to information about equipment being sold and also sent e-mails to 35,000-50,000 target customers. Additionally, at least two weeks prior to the sale, they advertised in a publication known as "Truck Paper," which has a nationwide circulation of 700,000 people. Also, Roger Doyle, an employee of CitiCapital Technology, called 50-100 potential buyers to notify them of the upcoming sale. 25. After extensive marketing of the Lease No. 468 equipment, it was sold at public auction in Ontario, California. The date and gross amount received from the public auction is set forth below. LEASED EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION One (1) 2000 Peterbilt Truck W/MTM 11 YD Bridgemaster V Mixer One (1) 2000 Peterbilt Truck W/MTM 11 YD Bridgemaster V Mixer VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION # INPAL00X1YD493161 W/58419-15606 INPAL00X3YD493162 W/57170-16029 SALE PRICE AND DATE $58,500 2/10/04 $60,000 2/10/04

26. The Lease No. 548 equipment was sold by private sale. The date and gross 24 amount received from the private sale is set forth below: 25 26 27 28
Case 2:03-cv-01587-JAT Document 88

-7Filed 07/21/2006 Page 7 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Case 2:03-cv-01587-JAT Document 88

LEASED EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION Invoice #020969 One (1) Vince Hagan Model VH-10945P Free Standing Jet Pulse Dust Conveyor with baby-buggy style dust shroud, ducting and dust recycle system Invoice #020970 One (1) 5" Fill Pipe in lieu of a 4" Fill Pipe as quoted Two (2) additional 5" Fill Pipes Invoice #OR00821C1 One (1) Vince Hagan Model 3200BAL Elevated Silo with VH24SJP and 14" Screw Conveyor One (1) Silo Work Platform Option

SALE PRICE AND DATE $29,500 10/20/04

27. CitiCapital Technology properly calculated its damages under the express provisions of Lease Nos. 468 and 548. It properly discounted future rents to present value. Additionally, it properly credited all payments made and properly credited all net sale proceeds from the disposition of the equipment included in Lease Nos. 468 and 548. 28. Under the express provisions of Lease Nos. 468 and 548, GTI agreed to pay CitiCapital Technology its reasonable attorney's fees, as well as all other expenses incurred by CitiCapital Technology in connection with the enforcement of any of its remedies. 29. Under an agreement designated as Lease No. 211-0106451-000 ("Lease No. 451"), executed by GTI, and thereafter executed by CitiCapital Commercial, CitiCapital Commercial financed GTI's acquisition of certain equipment in exchange for GTI's promise to make sixty monthly payments in the amount of $1,670.00. 30. Under an agreement designated as Lease No. 211-0106452-000 ("Lease No. 452"), executed by GTI, and thereafter executed by CitiCapital Commercial, CitiCapital Commercial financed GTI's acquisition of certain equipment in -8Filed 07/21/2006 Page 8 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 451 21 22 23 24 25 7004 26 27 28 453 452

exchange for GTI's promise to make sixty monthly payments in the amount of $3,188.00. 31. Under an agreement designated as Lease No. 211-0106453-000 ("Lease No. 453"), executed by GTI, and thereafter executed by CitiCapital Commercial, CitiCapital Commercial financed GTI's acquisition of certain equipment in exchange for GTI's promise to make sixty monthly payments in the amount of $1,670.00. 32. Under an agreement designated as Lease No. 211-0107004-000 ("Lease No. 7004"), executed by GTI, and thereafter executed by CitiCapital Commercial, CitiCapital Commercial financed GTI's acquisition of certain equipment in exchange for GTI's promise to make sixty monthly payments in the amount of $3,193.08. 33. Defendants Grant and Teri Goodman guarantied Lease Nos. 451, 452, 453, and 7004 (the "G and T Guaranties"). By executing said guaranties, Defendants Grant and Teri Goodman guarantied all payments, charges, and obligations due under Lease Nos. 451, 452, 453, and 7004. 34. Under Lease Nos. 451, 452, 453, and 7004, GTI agreed to lease from CitiCapital Commercial the following described personal property: LEASE NO. LEASED EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION Two (2) 2002 Vantage P-41-1000 Pneumatic Tank Trailers Two (2) 2002 Peterbilt 357 Conventional Tractors w/ Gardner Denver Blowers Two (2) 2002 Vantage P-41-1000 Pneumatic Bulk Trailers VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION # 4EPPA41252BBA4130 4EPPA41272BBA4131 1XPAD09X32D574711 1XPAD09X52D574712 4EPPA41292BBA4132 4EPPA41202BBA4133

Two (2) 2002 Peterbilt 357 Tractors 1XPAD09X52D579196 w/ Gardner Denver Blowers 1XPAD09X72D579197

35. Lease Nos. 451, 452, 453, and 7004 went into default for the failure to pay the -9Case 2:03-cv-01587-JAT Document 88 Filed 07/21/2006 Page 9 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

monthly rent due in April, 2003. Lease Nos. 451, 452, 453, and 7004 remain in default. 36. Pursuant to the terms of Lease Nos. 451, 452, 453, and 7004, upon default CitiCapital Commercial is entitled to immediate possession of the equipment included in Lease Nos. 451, 452, 453, and 7004 and is entitled to sell or otherwise dispose of it. CitiCapital Commercial is also entitled to apply the proceeds of any such disposition to the indebtedness of GTI to CitiCapital Commercial. 37. In the GTI bankruptcy case, the court entered an Order that authorized CitiCapital Commercial's recovery of the equipment included in Lease Nos. 451, 452, 453, and 7004. After repossessing the equipment, CitiCapital

Commercial provided notice to all parties of the sale of the equipment included in Lease Nos. 451, 452, 453, and 7004. 38. CitiCapital Commercial and Nationwide Auction entered into an agreement in which Nationwide Auction agreed to assist in the sale of CitiCapital Commercial's repossessed equipment. Pursuant to this agreement, Nationwide Auction provided a site on which to hold the public auction sales and also assisted in marketing the sales. 39. In order to hold a successful public auction sale, CitiCapital Commercial, in conjunction with Nationwide Auction, marketed the equipment included in Lease Nos. 451, 452, 453, and 7004. At least ten days prior to the sale, they sent out 5,000 to 10,000 brochures, which listed the inventory being sold at the upcoming sale. At least two weeks prior to the sale, they provided Internet access to information about equipment being sold and also sent e-mails to 35,000-50,000 target customers. Additionally, at least two weeks prior to the sale, they advertised in a publication known as "Truck Paper," which has a nationwide circulation of 700,000 people. - 10 Case 2:03-cv-01587-JAT Document 88 Filed 07/21/2006 Page 10 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 451 7 8 9 452 10 11 452 12 13 453 14 15 16 7004 17 18 19 7004 453 451

40. After extensive marketing of the equipment included in Lease Nos. 451, 452, 453, and 7004, it was sold at public auction in Ontario, California. The date and gross amount received from the public auction sale(s) is set forth below: LEASE LEASED EQUIPMENT NO. DESCRIPTION VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION # SALE PRICE AND DATE 4EPPA41252BBA4130 4EPPA41272BBA4131 1XPAD09X32D574711 $22,000 11/21/03 $23,500 11/20/03 $58,500 11/21/03 $51,000 11/24/03 $24,750 11/21/03 $25,500 11/20/03 $51,000 11/21/03 $51,000 11/21/03

One (1) 2002 Vantage P-41-1000 Pneumatic Tank Trailer One (1) 2002 Vantage P-41-1000 Pneumatic Tank Trailer One (1) 2002 Peterbilt 357 Conventional Tractor w/ Gardner Denver Blower One (1) 2002 Peterbilt Conventional Tractor w/ Gardner Denver Blower One (1) 2002 Vantage P-41-1000 Pneumatic Bulk Trailer One (1) 2002 Vantage P-41-1000 Pneumatic Bulk Trailer

1XPAD09X52D574712

4EPPA41292BBA4132 4EPPA41202BBA4133

One (1) 2002 Peterbilt 357 Tractor 1XPAD09X52D579196 w/ Gardner Denver Blower One (1) 2002 Peterbilt 357 Tractor 1XPAD09X72D579197 w/ Gardner Denver Blower

41. CitiCapital Commercial assigned Lease Nos. 451, 452, 453, and 7004 (referred 20 to as the "GE Leases") and the G and T Guaranties to GE. GE is the owner and 21 holder of the GE Leases and the G and T Guaranties. 22 42. GE properly calculated its damages under the express provisions of the GE 23 Leases. It properly calculated a final adjustment for each lease. Additionally, 24 it properly credited all payments made and properly credited all net sale 25 proceeds from the disposition of the equipment included in Lease Nos. 451, 452, 26 453, and 7004. 27 28
Case 2:03-cv-01587-JAT Document 88

- 11 Filed 07/21/2006 Page 11 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 II.

43. Under the express provisions of the GE Leases, GTI agreed to pay all reasonable attorney's fees as well as all other expenses incurred in connection with the enforcement of any of the remedies under the GE leases. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The basis for the Court's jurisdiction is diversity of citizenship pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332. 2. Where a contract provides damages provisions in the event of a breach, the Court will enforce the contract as written. Green v. Snodgrass, 289 P.2d 191, 193 (Ariz. 1955). These damages provisions generally control unless they are unconscionable. See Davis v. AZ Boys Choir Soc., 669 P.2d 1005, 1010 (Ariz. App. 1983). 3. The test of whether a repossession sale is valid is whether every aspect of the disposition is commercially reasonable. A.R.S. § 47-2706. The determination of what is reasonable is generally a question of fact. Gulf Homes, Inc. v. Goubeaux, 602 P.2d 810, 812 (Ariz. 1979). 4. Unless otherwise agreed, sale may be at a public or private sale. Sale may be as a unit or in parcels and may be at any time and place and on any terms. A.R.S. § 47-2706. 5. The fact that a better price could have been obtained by a sale at a different time or in a different method from that selected by the secured party is not of itself sufficient to establish that the sale was not made in a commercially reasonable manner. If the secured party either: (1) sells the collateral in the usual manner in any recognized market, or (2) sells at the price current in such market at the time of his sale, or (3) otherwise sells in conformity with reasonable commercial practices among dealers in the type of property sold, he has sold in a commercially reasonable manner. A.R.S. § 47-9627.

- 12 Case 2:03-cv-01587-JAT Document 88 Filed 07/21/2006 Page 12 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

III. RESULT The only issue in this case centers around the amount, if any, that Plaintiffs have been damaged. Because the parties included liquidated damages provisions in each of the lease agreements at issue, the Court will enforce these provisions. The Court previously stated in its September 27, 2005 Order that the liquidated damages provisions included in the lease agreements are not unconscionable. The Court also stated that "the amount fixed is reasonable to the extent that it approximates the loss anticipated at the time of the making of the contract, even though it may not approximate the actual loss." Pima Savings and Loan Association v. Rampello, 812 P.2d 1115, 1118 (Ariz. App. 1991). Plaintiffs properly followed the express provisions of the lease agreements upon default. Pursuant to the lease agreements, Plaintiffs repossessed the equipment and sold it by way of both public auction and private sale. Defendants argue that these sales were not executed in a commercially reasonable manner, but the Court disagrees. Plaintiffs, in conjunction with Nationwide Auction, engaged in extensive marketing of all of the repossessed equipment. Their marketing efforts, which included brochures, e-mails, Internet access to sale information, and personal phone calls to potential buyers, were reasonably calculated to notify potential buyers of the sale. Additionally, Plaintiffs sold the equipment in Ontario, California, which is a recognized market for the sale of construction equipment. Because Plaintiffs sold the repossessed equipment in a recognized market and in the usual manner, which included both public auction and private sale, their sales were executed in a commercially reasonable manner under A.R.S. § 47-9627. Following the sale of each piece of equipment, Plaintiffs properly used the liquidated damages provisions in each lease agreement to calculate the deficiencies due under the agreements. Based on these calculations, CitiCapital Technology is entitled to judgment in its favor and against Defendant Grant Goodman as follows: (a) as to Lease No. 121, the amount of $51,213.80 plus interest at the rate of fifteen percent (15%) from April 23, 2005 through the date judgment is entered; (b) as to Lease No. 122, the amount of $5,178.14 plus - 13 Case 2:03-cv-01587-JAT Document 88 Filed 07/21/2006 Page 13 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

interest at the rate of fifteen percent (15%) from April 23, 2005 through the date judgment is entered; (c) as to Lease No. 468, the amount of $59,716.73 plus interest at the rate of ten percent (10%) from April 23, 2005 through the date judgment is entered; and (d) as to Lease No. 548, the amount of $25,801.26 plus interest at the rate of ten percent (10%) from April 23, 2005 through the date judgment is entered. Additionally, GE is entitled to judgment in its favor and against Defendants Grant and Teri Goodman as follows: (a) as to Lease No. 451, the amount of $40,723.94 plus interest at the rate of ten percent (10%) from April 23, 2005 through the date judgment is entered; (b) as to Lease No. 452, the amount of $60,834.57 plus interest at the rate of ten percent (10%) from April 23, 2005 through the date judgment is entered; (c) as to Lease No. 453, the amount of $40,268.45 plus interest at the rate of ten percent (10%) from April 23, 2005 through the date judgment is entered; and (d) as to Lease No. 7004, the amount of $73,093.31 plus interest at the rate of ten percent (10%) from April 23, 2005 through the date judgment is entered. IV. JUDGMENT Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in favor of CitiCapital Technology and against Defendant Grant Goodman in the amount of $56,391.94 plus interest to be calculated at a rate of 15% from April 23, 2005 through the date judgment is entered (following the entry of judgment, interest shall accrue at the applicable federal rate). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in favor of CitiCapital Technology and against Defendant Grant Goodman in the amount of $85,517.99 plus interest to be calculated at a rate of 10% from April 23, 2005 through the date judgment is entered (following the entry of judgment, interest shall accrue at the applicable federal rate). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in - 14 Case 2:03-cv-01587-JAT Document 88 Filed 07/21/2006 Page 14 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

favor of GE and against Defendants Grant and Teri Goodman in the amount of $214,920.27 plus interest to be calculated at a rate of 10% from April 23, 2005 through the date judgment is entered (following the entry of judgment, interest shall accrue at the applicable federal rate). DATED this 20th day of July, 2006.

- 15 Case 2:03-cv-01587-JAT Document 88 Filed 07/21/2006 Page 15 of 15