Accused Ronald J. Ramos appeals a judgment following demonstration court led a verdict in support of plaintiff Home Federal Offers & Loan Association (Household Federal) out of Ramos’s accountability into a personal loan guaranty. We affirm.
Thomas Lynn, a major financing manager to have House Government, discussed this new agreement having Brooks and you may waiting about three files-the mortgage amendment arrangement, brand new promissory mention and [229 Cal
Accused Ramos is actually chairman of Ramos/Jensen Organization (R/J Co.), a ca agency. R/J Co. try all round spouse of a finite commitment, this new Peacock Ridge Business (Peacock), shaped to do the fresh new Peacock Ridge framework endeavor. Ranging from Sep 1983 and you will February 1985, plaintiff House Government loaned almost $seven.cuatro million into Peacock union. Each of the four os.
At that time, Peacock owed good sums when you look at the accumulated attention along with almost every other financial obligation to the the project. House Government approved a beneficial “work out arrangement” where they forgave all but $one hundred,000 of your attract and accessible to loan Peacock a supplementary $50,000. In exchange, Peacock guaranteed to perform a beneficial promissory mention to own $150,100000 safeguarded from the an individual guaranty closed by Ramos.
The new workout agreement try discussed on behalf of Peacock from the Arthur Brooks, a keen Roentgen/J Co. staff member. App. 3d 1612] private guarantee-which he brought to Brooks for the purpose of getting Ramos’s signature. Brooks returned most of the three finalized documents in order to Lynn toward December 18, 1986.fn. step one
The brand new promissory note considering a signature range to possess “Ronald J. Ramos, President” regarding Roentgen/J Co. because the standard spouse from Peacock. Ramos closed the new document “Roentgen.J. Ramos, Pres.” The private warranty provided the next medical language:
Because of the November 1986, financial difficulties towards opportunity triggered Peacock so you’re able to default on House Government loans
“In consideration of your financing about Organization so you can Debtor, We, Ronald J. Ramos loans Winton California (Guarantor), absolutely and you may unconditionally verify and you may pledge to invest so you can Association, or whoever Connection purchases me to shell out, all indebtedness of Debtor so you’re able to Relationship confirmed because of the, or even in in whatever way associated with the mortgage (including although not limited to extra advances otherwise fund) or even the notice, and carry out all covenants and you can preparations regarding Borrower within the fresh new notice or one shelter arrangement anywhere between Debtor and you may Association.” The new trademark line in the bottom of your document provided for the newest trademark regarding “Ronald J. Ramos.” Rather, Ramos closed it he’d finalized the fresh new promissory note: “Roentgen.J. Ramos, Pres.”
Whenever Peacock defaulted into the brand new note and House Government brought fit in order to enforce the new guaranty, Ramos defended on the floor you to his signature just like the “Pres.” indicated an intent in order to join merely R/J Co. rather than himself yourself on guaranty. Within close of the many proof, the latest demonstration legal offered Domestic Federal’s actions to own a led decision, finishing it actually was limited by the court’s choice in Sebastian Globally, Inc. v. Peck (1987) 195 Cal. App. three dimensional 803 [240 Cal. Rptr. 911].
I start with a keyword about the procedural pose of case. This new trial judge led a verdict facing Ramos, concluding there can be no conflict within the [229 Cal. App. three dimensional 1613] the relevant foundational research and you can assuming in itself limited by an earlier Court from Desire decision. (Pick essentially Car Guarantee Transformation, Inc. v. Superior Courtroom (1962) 57 Cal. 2d 450, 455 [20 Cal. Rptr. 321, 369 P.2d 937].) [2a] Despite its lack of a regulating appellate decision, however, the fresh new legal try proper during the deciding one no jury concern is showed. As the Best Legal explained when you look at the Parsons v. Bristol Advancement Co. (1965) 62 Cal. 2d 861 [49 Cal. Rptr. 767, 402 P.2d 839], “The brand new translation of a created software, whilst it involves what might properly feel named concerns out of reality [citation], is essentially an official setting to get exercised depending on the basically acknowledged canons off translation therefore, the reason for this new tool may be provided impression. . Therefore it is solely an official setting in order to interpret a written instrument until the newest interpretation converts through to the brand new trustworthiness out-of extrinsic proof.” (Id. at the p. 865; see along with Medical Surgery Management, Inc. v. Federal Health Laboratories, Inc. (1986) 176 Cal. App. 3d 886, 891-892 [222 Cal. Rptr. 455].) [2b] Right here, once the parties exhibited little relevant with no conflicting extrinsic proof (select Pacific Fuel & Elizabeth. Co. v. Grams.W. Thomas Drayage etcetera. Co. (1968) 69 Cal. 2d 33, 37 [69 Cal. Rptr. 561, 442 P.2d 641, forty An effective.L.R.three dimensional 1373]), the new trial legal properly refused to submit the translation of the written guarantee towards jury. (See Scientific Businesses Management, supra, 176 Cal.Application.three dimensional at the p. 892, fn.cuatro.) Likewise, however, we as evaluating courtroom check out the research and understand new guaranty de- novo. (Parsons, supra, 62 Cal.2d on p. 866; Medical Surgery Government, supra, 176 Cal.App.three-dimensional in the p. 891.)
