Defendant Ronald J. Ramos appeals a view adopting the trial judge brought a verdict in favor of plaintiff House Government Coupons & Mortgage Connection (House Government) out-of Ramos’s liability towards the a consumer loan guarantee. We affirm.
Thomas Lynn, a major mortgage officer to own House Government, negotiated this new agreement with Brooks and you will prepared about three data files-the loan amendment arrangement, the promissory notice and also the [229 Cal
Accused Ramos was president of your own Ramos/Jensen Business (R/J Co.), a california agency. R/J Co. was the entire lover away from a finite union, the Peacock Ridge Team (Peacock), designed to complete the newest Peacock Ridge build enterprise. Anywhere between Sep 1983 and you will March 1985, plaintiff Home Government loaned nearly $eight.cuatro mil for the Peacock relationship. All the five os.
When this occurs, Peacock due generous sums for the accrued interest and had other personal debt in connection with the project. Family Federal accepted a good “exercise contract” where they forgave all but $100,one hundred thousand of your appeal and you may accessible to mortgage Peacock a supplementary $50,one hundred thousand. In return, Peacock guaranteed to perform a beneficial promissory note for $150,100000 safeguarded from the a personal guarantee finalized from the Ramos.
The new workout agreement was negotiated on the part of Peacock by Arthur Brooks, a keen Roentgen/J Co. employee. App. three dimensional 1612] personal guaranty-which he taken to Brooks for the purpose of acquiring Ramos’s signature. Brooks came back all of the around three closed files so you can Lynn on December 18, 1986.fn. 1
This new promissory notice offered a signature range to own “Ronald J. Ramos, President” regarding R/J Co. as the standard lover from Peacock. Ramos signed the brand new document “R.J. Ramos, Pres.” The personal warranty integrated the next surgical code:
By November 1986, financial difficulties with the project triggered Peacock to standard on Domestic Government fund
“From inside the thought of loan from the Association to help you Borrower, We, Ronald J. Ramos (Guarantor), positively and you can for any reason ensure and you will guarantee to invest so you can Organization, otherwise whomever Relationship requests us to shell out, every indebtedness from Borrower so you can Connection evidenced because of the, or even in any way about the loan (as well as but not restricted to most advances or money) or even the note, also to do the covenants and you may agreements out-of Debtor contained in the new notice or one defense agreement ranging from Borrower and you can Organization.” Brand new signature loans in El Moro range at the end of your file sent to the fresh new signature regarding “Ronald J. Ramos.” Alternatively, Ramos finalized it as he had signed the fresh promissory note: “R.J. Ramos, Pres.”
Whenever Peacock defaulted towards the brand new notice and House Government produced match so you’re able to enforce brand new guarantee, Ramos defended on to the ground that their trademark once the “Pres.” conveyed an intent so you can bind merely Roentgen/J Co. and never themselves personally to the guarantee. In the intimate of all the research, this new demo judge offered Family Federal’s activity having a directed verdict, finishing it had been limited by the fresh court’s decision in Sebastian Worldwide, Inc. v. Peck (1987) 195 Cal. App. 3d 803 [240 Cal. Rptr. 911].
I start out with a word towards proceeding pose of your own circumstances. The newest trial judge led a verdict against Ramos, concluding there’s zero argument inside [229 Cal. Application. three dimensional 1613] the appropriate foundational research and you will trusting in itself bound by a young Courtroom of Desire decision. (Discover essentially Vehicles Security Conversion process, Inc. v. Superior Courtroom (1962) 57 Cal. 2d 450, 455 [20 Cal. Rptr. 321, 369 P.2d 937].) [2a] Inside the absence of a managing appellate decision, but not, the new court try correct during the deciding you to definitely no jury matter try shown. As Supreme Legal told me into the Parsons v. Bristol Innovation Co. (1965) 62 Cal. 2d 861 [forty-two Cal. Rptr. 767, 402 P.2d 839], “The latest interpretation away from a composed tool, even though it pertains to what would properly end up being called inquiries out of facts [citation], is largely an official function is exercised according to the fundamentally recognized canons from translation so that the reason for the brand new instrument is offered effect. . Therefore it is entirely an official form to help you understand a composed tool until the fresh new translation transforms up on new credibility of extrinsic proof.” (Id. from the p. 865; look for together with Medical Operations Management, Inc. v. National Health Laboratories, Inc. (1986) 176 Cal. App. three dimensional 886, 891-892 [222 Cal. Rptr. 455].) [2b] Here, due to the fact functions exhibited little relevant no contradictory extrinsic proof (discover Pacific Energy & E. Co. v. Grams.W. Thomas Drayage etcetera. Co. (1968) 69 Cal. 2d 33, 37 [69 Cal. Rptr. 561, 442 P.2d 641, forty A great.L.Roentgen.three-dimensional 1373]), the new demonstration courtroom safely would not submit brand new translation of your own created guaranty towards the jury. (See Medical Procedures Administration, supra, 176 Cal.Software.three dimensional within p. 892, fn.4.) On the other hand, although not, i while the reviewing court take into account the facts and you may interpret the fresh new warranty de novo. (Parsons, supra, 62 Cal.2d during the p. 866; Scientific Functions Government, supra, 176 Cal.App.three-dimensional on p. 891.)
