Offender Ronald J. Ramos appeals a wisdom following demonstration court directed a verdict and only plaintiff Domestic Federal Discounts & Financing Connection (House Government) from Ramos’s accountability toward a personal loan guaranty. I affirm.
Thomas Lynn, a major mortgage manager to possess Household Government, negotiated the brand new arrangement having Brooks and you may waiting three data files-the borrowed funds modification agreement, the new promissory mention and the [229 Cal
Accused Ramos try chairman of https://paydayloancolorado.net/eaton/ your own Ramos/Jensen Team (R/J Co.), a california organization. R/J Co. is actually the entire mate away from a small partnership, the fresh Peacock Ridge Team (Peacock), molded to complete brand new Peacock Ridge build venture. Anywhere between Sep 1983 and you can February 1985, plaintiff Home Government loaned almost $seven.4 mil to your Peacock union. Each one of the four operating system.
At that time, Peacock due good-sized figures into the accrued interest along with most other financial obligation about the your panels. House Government accepted an excellent “work out agreement” in which it forgave all but $one hundred,100 of your notice and you may provided to loan Peacock an additional $fifty,000. In return, Peacock guaranteed to perform a great promissory notice to possess $150,100 protected by the a personal guaranty signed of the Ramos.
The fresh work out agreement is discussed for Peacock because of the Arthur Brooks, an enthusiastic Roentgen/J Co. staff member. Software. three dimensional 1612] individual guaranty-which he brought to Brooks for the intended purpose of obtaining Ramos’s signature. Brooks came back most of the about three signed documents in order to Lynn on December 18, 1986.fn. 1
New promissory note offered a trademark range to have “Ronald J. Ramos, President” away from Roentgen/J Co. just like the standard spouse of Peacock. Ramos signed the new file “R.J. Ramos, Pres.” The non-public guarantee included next medical vocabulary:
By the November 1986, financial difficulties on the enterprise triggered Peacock so you can default to the Home Federal loans
“For the said of the loan throughout the Association so you can Borrower, I, Ronald J. Ramos (Guarantor), seriously and you will for any reason ensure and you can vow to expend so you’re able to Organization, or anyone who Association sales me to pay, any and all indebtedness regarding Borrower to help you Organization confirmed by, or in in any manner connected with the borrowed funds (plus however limited to most improves or financing) and/or notice, and perform all the covenants and you will agreements away from Borrower within the fresh new mention otherwise one security agreement anywhere between Borrower and you can Organization.” Brand new signature line at the end of one’s file delivered to the new signature out-of “Ronald J. Ramos.” Alternatively, Ramos finalized it he previously closed new promissory notice: “Roentgen.J. Ramos, Pres.”
Whenever Peacock defaulted with the new mention and you may Domestic Government brought fit to enforce the fresh new guaranty, Ramos defended on to the ground you to definitely their signature since the “Pres.” indicated an intent so you’re able to join just Roentgen/J Co. and not himself myself into warranty. At the personal of all of the facts, the fresh demonstration courtroom granted Household Federal’s actions for a brought verdict, finishing it was limited by this new court’s decision into the Sebastian Globally, Inc. v. Peck (1987) 195 Cal. Software. three dimensional 803 [240 Cal. Rptr. 911].
I begin with a word towards procedural present of situation. The fresh new trial legal directed a decision against Ramos, finishing there can be zero conflict from inside the [229 Cal. Software. 3d 1613] the relevant foundational evidence and you may thinking in itself limited by an early Judge out of Focus decision. (Come across generally Auto Collateral Conversion process, Inc. v. Superior Courtroom (1962) 57 Cal. 2d 450, 455 [20 Cal. Rptr. 321, 369 P.2d 937].) [2a] Even yet in the absence of a controlling appellate decision, yet not, this new judge try correct in deciding one to no jury concern is presented. Just like the Ultimate Judge explained in the Parsons v. Bristol Advancement Co. (1965) 62 Cal. 2d 861 [44 Cal. Rptr. 767, 402 P.2d 839], “The brand new translation from an authored instrument, while it involves what might safely be titled inquiries out-of truth [citation], is essentially an official mode to get exercised with regards to the essentially approved canons away from translation therefore the purposes of the brand new software tends to be given perception. . So it’s entirely a judicial mode so you can interpret an authored device unless the new interpretation converts on the newest dependability from extrinsic facts.” (Id. on p. 865; see together with Medical Functions Administration, Inc. v. Federal Wellness Laboratories, Inc. (1986) 176 Cal. App. three dimensional 886, 891-892 [222 Cal. Rptr. 455].) [2b] Here, once the activities showed nothing related without contradictory extrinsic research (select Pacific Gasoline & Elizabeth. Co. v. G.W. Thomas Drayage etcetera. Co. (1968) 69 Cal. 2d 33, 37 [69 Cal. Rptr. 561, 442 P.2d 641, 40 A.L.Roentgen.three-dimensional 1373]), brand new trial legal safely would not fill in the fresh new interpretation of one’s composed warranty towards the jury. (Pick Scientific Operations Management, supra, 176 Cal.App.3d in the p. 892, fn.4.) On top of that, although not, i once the examining judge check out the research and you can interpret the fresh new guarantee de- novo. (Parsons, supra, 62 Cal.2d on p. 866; Scientific Operations Management, supra, 176 Cal.App.3d in the p. 891.)