Defendant Ronald J. Ramos is attractive a view following personal installment loans in Delta demonstration court directed a verdict and only plaintiff Domestic Federal Discounts & Loan Relationship (House Federal) of Ramos’s responsibility with the a consumer loan guaranty. We affirm.
Thomas Lynn, a primary loan officer getting Domestic Government, discussed the fresh new arrangement that have Brooks and you may prepared about three documents-the borrowed funds modification contract, the fresh new promissory note while the [229 Cal
Offender Ramos are president of one’s Ramos/Jensen Team (R/J Co.), a ca agency. R/J Co. is the general mate off a limited connection, new Peacock Ridge Organization (Peacock), molded to accomplish the fresh new Peacock Ridge structure project. Anywhere between September 1983 and you may February 1985, plaintiff Home Federal loaned almost $seven.cuatro mil into Peacock relationship. Each of the five operating-system.
When this occurs, Peacock due large amounts inside accumulated attract along with almost every other financial obligation in connection with the project. Home Government recognized a great «exercise arrangement» where it forgave just about $one hundred,one hundred thousand of desire and wanted to mortgage Peacock a supplementary $50,000. Inturn, Peacock assured to execute an effective promissory notice getting $150,one hundred thousand secured by the an individual guarantee finalized by Ramos.
Brand new work-out agreement is actually negotiated on the part of Peacock because of the Arthur Brooks, an R/J Co. employee. Application. 3d 1612] private guaranty-which he delivered to Brooks for the purpose of getting Ramos’s signature. Brooks came back every three closed data files so you can Lynn towards the December 18, 1986.fn. step 1
The brand new promissory notice given a signature range for «Ronald J. Ramos, President» away from Roentgen/J Co. because standard spouse off Peacock. Ramos finalized new document «Roentgen.J. Ramos, Pres.» The non-public guarantee included another surgical vocabulary:
Because of the November 1986, financial difficulties on the endeavor caused Peacock in order to default with the Home Federal finance
«For the thought of your financing in the Organization to Borrower, We, Ronald J. Ramos (Guarantor), surely and unconditionally be certain that and you can promise to spend so you’re able to Connection, or whoever Organization orders us to spend, any and all indebtedness off Borrower so you can Connection confirmed of the, or in any way linked to the borrowed funds (plus not simply for even more advances otherwise finance) or even the mention, and also to perform all covenants and you will arrangements off Borrower present in the new note otherwise any security arrangement ranging from Debtor and you can Association.» New signature range towards the bottom of the file provided for the fresh new signature out of «Ronald J. Ramos.» As an alternative, Ramos closed it as he had finalized the brand new promissory note: «Roentgen.J. Ramos, Pres.»
Whenever Peacock defaulted for the the brand new note and you will House Federal introduced fit so you’re able to enforce the brand new guaranty, Ramos defended on the floor one their signature because the «Pres.» expressed a purpose so you’re able to join simply Roentgen/J Co. and not himself myself into the guaranty. During the romantic of the many facts, the brand new trial legal offered House Federal’s actions getting a directed verdict, concluding it absolutely was limited by the brand new court’s decision from inside the Sebastian In the world, Inc. v. Peck (1987) 195 Cal. Software. three-dimensional 803 [240 Cal. Rptr. 911].
We start with a term towards procedural position of the circumstances. The fresh demonstration judge brought a verdict up against Ramos, concluding there can be zero conflict from inside the [229 Cal. Application. 3d 1613] the relevant foundational evidence and you may assuming in itself limited by a young Court out of Desire choice. (Select fundamentally Car Equity Sales, Inc. v. Premium Courtroom (1962) 57 Cal. 2d 450, 455 [20 Cal. Rptr. 321, 369 P.2d 937].) [2a] Inside the absence of a regulating appellate decision, although not, the newest judge is actually correct for the determining you to definitely zero jury matter is actually shown. While the Ultimate Legal explained inside Parsons v. Bristol Development Co. (1965) 62 Cal. 2d 861 [forty-two Cal. Rptr. 767, 402 P.2d 839], «The latest translation out of an authored software, even though it comes to what can securely become named concerns out-of facts [citation], is essentially an official setting to-be resolved with regards to the basically acknowledged canons off interpretation and so the reason for the brand new appliance are considering impression. . It is therefore solely an official function so you can interpret a created tool unless the fresh new interpretation converts upon the latest dependability of extrinsic facts.» (Id. from the p. 865; come across together with Scientific Functions Government, Inc. v. National Fitness Laboratories, Inc. (1986) 176 Cal. App. three dimensional 886, 891-892 [222 Cal. Rptr. 455].) [2b] Right here, due to the fact parties presented little associated without conflicting extrinsic evidence (see 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, 40 A good.L.R.three dimensional 1373]), new demo court safely would not fill in the latest interpretation of your own composed warranty for the jury. (See Scientific Businesses Government, supra, 176 Cal.App.three-dimensional from the p. 892, fn.cuatro.) At exactly the same time, yet not, we since the examining court look at the research and you will translate the new guaranty de- novo. (Parsons, supra, 62 Cal.2d within p. 866; Medical Businesses Administration, supra, 176 Cal.Software.three dimensional during the p. 891.)