![Teac Corp. v. Bauer](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![Teac Corp. v. Bauer](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
Teac Corp. v. Bauer
678 P.2d 3, 1984.CO.40628
-
- 0,99 €
-
- 0,99 €
Beschreibung des Verlags
Opinion by JUSTICE HODGES Defendant (Bauer) appeals a judgment entered after a trial to the court holding him liable under a personal guarantee for a corporate debt. We affirm. Plaintiff (Teac) is a manufacturer of audio equipment. Bauer was an officer of A.M.I. Audio Brokers, Inc., (AMI) a retailer of audio equipment whose purchases from Teac were financed by Finance America Private Brands, Inc., (Finance America) under a commercial floor plan security agreement. Teac presented evidence that when AMI fell into arrears to Finance America, Teac paid AMI's debt to Finance America in return for assignment of Finance America's rights against AMI. Teac then brought suit against Bauer and others.