Offender Ronald J. Ramos is attractive a judgment following the demo judge led a verdict in favor of plaintiff Domestic Federal Offers & Financing Relationship (House Government) of Ramos’s accountability on the a personal loan guarantee. I affirm.
Thomas Lynn, a primary financing manager to possess House Government, discussed the fresh new arrangement which have Brooks and you will wishing around three files-the mortgage modification arrangement, this new promissory mention and [229 Cal
Offender Ramos is actually chairman of your own Ramos/Jensen Company (R/J Co.), a ca firm. R/J Co. is the general mate of a restricted union, the fresh new Peacock Ridge Company (Peacock), molded doing new Peacock Ridge build endeavor. Between Sep 1983 and you will March 1985, plaintiff Family Federal loaned nearly $7.cuatro mil with the Peacock partnership. Each of the four operating-system.
At that point, Peacock due substantial amounts in the accrued appeal along with almost every other obligations to the your panels. Household Government recognized a good “workout contract” where it forgave all but $a hundred,100000 of one’s appeal and you can accessible to loan Peacock a supplementary $fifty,100000. Reciprocally, Peacock assured to execute a good promissory notice getting $150,000 secured by the an individual guaranty closed of the Ramos.
The fresh new work-out agreement try discussed on the part of Peacock of the Arthur Brooks, an Roentgen/J Co. staff member. Software. three dimensional 1612] personal guarantee-he taken to Brooks with regards to acquiring Ramos’s signature. Brooks came back every around three finalized data so you’re able to Lynn towards the December 18, 1986.fn. step 1
The brand new promissory note provided a trademark line for “Ronald J. Ramos, President” out-of Roentgen/J Co. just like the standard companion away from Peacock. Ramos finalized the fresh file “R.J. Ramos, Pres.” The personal guaranty provided the following operative language:
Of the November 1986, financial hardships towards the enterprise brought about Peacock so you’re able to standard for the Domestic Government loans
“For the planning of your own mortgage from the Connection so you can Borrower, We, Ronald J. Ramos (Guarantor), absolutely and you can unconditionally be sure and you can hope to expend so you’re able to Connection, or whoever Connection instructions me to pay, any indebtedness of Debtor to Relationship confirmed by, or even in in any manner regarding the loan (including yet not simply for extra enhances otherwise finance) or perhaps the notice, in order to manage all covenants and you will preparations from Borrower contained in the latest notice or people safety arrangement ranging from Debtor and Connection.” The fresh trademark range at the bottom of your document taken to new signature out of “Ronald J. Ramos.” Instead, Ramos finalized it he’d finalized this new promissory note: “R.J. Ramos, Pres.”
Whenever Peacock defaulted on the the mention and Family Federal delivered suit to help you impose brand new warranty, Ramos defended on to the ground one to their trademark since the “Pres.” conveyed an intention to help you join merely Roentgen/J Co. rather than themselves individually with the guaranty. At intimate of the many evidence, the latest demo judge granted House Federal’s motion to own a directed decision, finishing it had been limited by the newest court’s choice inside the Sebastian Around the world, Inc. v. Peck (1987) 195 Cal. Application. three-dimensional 803 [240 Cal. Rptr. 911].
I start with a term concerning procedural posture of your situation. Brand new trial judge brought a verdict facing Ramos, concluding there was zero argument when you look at the [229 Cal. App. three dimensional 1613] the appropriate foundational research and trusting itself bound by an early Judge from Interest decision. (Come across generally Vehicle Equity Conversion process, Inc. v. Advanced Legal (1962) 57 Cal. 2d 450, 455 [20 Cal. Rptr. 321, 369 P.2d 937].) [2a] Even yet in the absence of a regulating appellate choice, however, the new court is actually best inside determining you to zero jury concern is actually presented. Just like the Ultimate Judge informed me within the Parsons v. Bristol Advancement Co. (1965) 62 Cal. 2d 861 [forty-two Cal. Rptr. 767, 402 P.2d 839], “The new interpretation out-of a composed instrument, whilst it pertains to what can safely feel entitled questions away from truth [citation], is essentially a judicial means is exercised depending on the generally accepted canons from translation and so the reason for the new software is given perception. . Making it solely an official means so you can understand a created appliance except if brand new interpretation transforms up on the dependability out-of extrinsic research.” (Id. on p. 865; look for including Scientific Functions Government, Inc. https://paydayloancolorado.net/fraser/ v. National Fitness Laboratories, Inc. (1986) 176 Cal. Application. three-dimensional 886, 891-892 [222 Cal. Rptr. 455].) [2b] Here, due to the fact people presented nothing related without conflicting extrinsic proof (find Pacific Gasoline & Elizabeth. Co. v. G.W. Thomas Drayage an such like. Co. (1968) 69 Cal. 2d 33, 37 [69 Cal. Rptr. 561, 442 P.2d 641, forty A good.L.Roentgen.three-dimensional 1373]), the new demonstration courtroom safely refused to fill in new translation of the written guarantee towards the jury. (Select Scientific Operations Management, supra, 176 Cal.Software.three dimensional at p. 892, fn.cuatro.) As well, but not, we since the examining judge consider the evidence and you will translate the latest guarantee de- novo. (Parsons, supra, 62 Cal.2d in the p. 866; Scientific Businesses Management, supra, 176 Cal.App.three dimensional during the p. 891.)
