The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 001) 2, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 were read on this motion for SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN LIEU OF COMPLAINT.

Plaintiff, H.I.G. Realty Financing II, LLC, moves under CPLR 3213 for summary judgment in lieu of complaint against defendant, Ranjodh S. Pannu, seeking to collect sums owed under two loan guarantees executed by Pannu. The motion is granted.

As an initial matter, plaintiff's claims under the guarantees at issue ordinarily would not be eligible for CPLR 3213 treatment. The obligations on which plaintiff is seeking to collect represent amounts that would have been payable by the counterparty to an interest-rate-protection agreement, had the borrower on the underlying loan entered into that agreement when [*2]required to under the terms of the loan. (See NYSCEF No. 9 at 2-3 [definition of "guaranteed obligations" under the first guarantee]; id. at 19-20 [definition of "guaranteed obligations" under the second guarantee].) The information required to determine those amounts (and thus the amounts claimed by plaintiff here) far exceeds a "de minimis deviation from the face of the document," as CPLR 3213 envisions. (Weissman v Sinorm Deli, Inc., 88 NY2d 437, 444 [1996].)

The parties agreed, however, that each guarantee "is, and is intended to be, an instrument for the payment of money only, as such phrase is used in Section 3213 of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules." (NYSCEF No. 9 at 16, 33 [emphasis added].) And defendant does not argue in opposition that the guarantees fail to satisfy the payment-of-money-only requirements of CPLR 3213. In these circumstances, the court concludes, the "parties have, by their actions, chosen the procedure which they seek to follow," and the court should therefore apply that procedure. (Reilly v Insurance Co. of N. Am., 32 AD2d 918, 918 [1st Dept 1969] [addressing the merits of motions brought under CPLR 3213 notwithstanding the "impropriety of the utilization of that section" in the eyes of the court]; accord Martin v City of Cohoes, 37 NY2d 162, 165-166 [1975] [explaining, in the context of a personal-injury action against a municipality, that "parties to a civil litigation, in the absence of a strong countervailing public policy, may consent, formally or by their conduct, to the law to be applied"].)

On the merits, plaintiff has established, prima facie, that it is entitled to the sums claimed under the two guarantees. Defendant does not submit evidence giving rise to a material dispute of fact on this issue. Defendant argues that the motion should be denied because plaintiff did not submit a statement of material facts under 22 NYCRR 202.8-g. But paragraph (a) of that rule states expressly that it does not apply to CPLR 3213 motions. Defendant also argues that a hearing is required to consider the reasonableness of the attorney fees claimed by plaintiff. But the need to determine the amount in attorney fees to which plaintiff is contractually entitled does not foreclose the grant of summary judgment on the principal amounts owed by defendant under the loan guarantees (plus interest).

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that plaintiff's CPLR 3213 motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint is granted, and plaintiff is awarded a judgment against defendant for (i) $1,103,376.49 in principal owed under the two guarantees; plus (ii) $40,652.57 in interest accrued on that amount at the contractual default rate from May 16, 2023, through September 30, 2023; plus (iii) costs and disbursements as taxed by the Clerk upon the submission of an appropriate bill of costs; and it is further

ORDERED that plaintiff may enter a supplemental judgment for (i) its reasonable attorney fees, plus (ii) interest that accrued from October 1, 2023, through April 1, 2024, on the principal amounts owed under the two guarantees, with the amount of those sums in attorney fees and interest to be determined by motion made on notice, supported by appropriate documentation; and it is further

ORDERED that plaintiff serve a copy of this order with notice of its entry on defendant and on the office of the County Clerk (by the means set forth in the court's e-filing protocol, available on the e-filing page of the court's website, https://ww2.nycourts.gov/courts/1jd/supctmanh/E-Filing.shtml), which shall enter judgment accordingly.