Offender Ronald J. Ramos is attractive a wisdom adopting the demonstration legal directed a verdict in favor of plaintiff House Government Discounts & Loan Association (House Federal) from Ramos’s responsibility towards a personal loan warranty. I affirm.

Thomas Lynn, a major mortgage administrator having Domestic Federal, discussed brand new arrangement that have Brooks and you can wishing three documents-the borrowed funds amendment agreement, the fresh new promissory notice and [229 Cal

Defendant Ramos try chairman of one’s Ramos/Jensen Organization (R/J Co.), a ca agency. R/J Co. try the overall lover regarding a limited union, the latest Peacock Ridge Company (Peacock), molded accomplish this new Peacock Ridge build endeavor. Between September 1983 and you can March 1985, plaintiff Family Federal loaned nearly $seven.4 mil on the Peacock relationship. All the four os.

At that time, Peacock owed generous amounts inside the accrued interest along with almost every other personal debt concerning your panels. Family Federal accepted a “workout arrangement” in which they forgave all but $one hundred,one hundred thousand of your notice and you will wanted to financing Peacock an extra $50,000. Reciprocally, Peacock assured to execute good promissory notice having $150,100 shielded of the an individual guarantee signed by the Ramos.

The newest workout agreement was discussed for Peacock by Arthur Brooks, an enthusiastic Roentgen/J Co. staff member. App. three dimensional 1612] private guaranty-he taken to Brooks for the true purpose of acquiring Ramos’s trademark. Brooks returned most of the around three finalized data in order to Lynn toward December 18, 1986.fn. 1

The newest promissory note given a trademark range to have “Ronald J. Ramos, President” out-of Roentgen/J Co. since the general mate out of Peacock. Ramos closed the new file “R.J. Ramos, Pres.” The non-public guaranty provided another medical code:

By November 1986, financial difficulties for the opportunity caused Peacock to help you standard toward Domestic Federal funds

“Into the consideration of one’s financing throughout the Organization so you can Borrower, I, Ronald J. Ramos (Guarantor), definitely and you may for any reason be sure and promise to invest so you can Relationship, otherwise the person who Organization orders me to pay, any indebtedness out of Borrower so you’re able to Organization evidenced from the, or in any way regarding the mortgage (plus not limited by additional improves otherwise fund) or even the mention, and to loan places Colorado City would most of the covenants and agreements out of Debtor found in the fresh new notice or any security agreement ranging from Debtor and you will Association.” This new signature range at the end of document sent to the latest signature of “Ronald J. Ramos.” Rather, Ramos signed it as he had closed the fresh promissory note: “Roentgen.J. Ramos, Pres.”

When Peacock defaulted on the brand new notice and you may Home Government put fit to enforce the guaranty, Ramos defended on to the floor you to his trademark since the “Pres.” indicated an intention so you can join simply R/J Co. and never himself individually on the guaranty. From the intimate of the many research, brand new demo court provided Family Federal’s motion to have a brought decision, concluding it actually was bound by this new court’s choice in the Sebastian Global, Inc. v. Peck (1987) 195 Cal. App. 3d 803 [240 Cal. Rptr. 911].

I start with a phrase towards proceeding present of the situation. The latest demo judge led a decision up against Ramos, finishing there was zero conflict when you look at the [229 Cal. App. 3d 1613] the appropriate foundational proof and you can believing itself limited by an earlier Court from Desire decision. (Look for generally Vehicles Equity Conversion process, Inc. v. Premium Judge (1962) 57 Cal. 2d 450, 455 [20 Cal. Rptr. 321, 369 P.2d 937].) [2a] Inside the absence of a managing appellate decision, however, brand new legal is actually proper inside choosing you to zero jury question is showed. Due to the fact Supreme Courtroom informed me from inside the Parsons v. Bristol Advancement Co. (1965) 62 Cal. 2d 861 [forty two Cal. Rptr. 767, 402 P.2d 839], “This new translation out-of a composed instrument, whilst it involves what might safely getting entitled concerns away from facts [citation], is basically an official mode to be exercised with respect to the basically recognized canons from interpretation therefore, the reason for brand new instrument can be given impression. . It is therefore exclusively an official means in order to understand a created means except if the newest translation transforms abreast of brand new credibility regarding extrinsic evidence.” (Id. on p. 865; find and Medical Functions Management, Inc. v. Federal Wellness Labs, Inc. (1986) 176 Cal. App. three-dimensional 886, 891-892 [222 Cal. Rptr. 455].) [2b] Right here, given that parties presented nothing associated without contradictory extrinsic facts (look for Pacific Gasoline & Age. Co. v. Grams.W. Thomas Drayage etcetera. Co. (1968) 69 Cal. 2d 33, 37 [69 Cal. Rptr. 561, 442 P.2d 641, forty A good.L.Roentgen.three-dimensional 1373]), the trial court securely would not complete the new translation of one’s created guarantee with the jury. (Get a hold of Medical Functions Management, supra, 176 Cal.App.three-dimensional in the p. 892, fn.4.) While doing so, not, i because the reviewing courtroom consider the proof and you will translate this new warranty de- novo. (Parsons, supra, 62 Cal.2d during the p. 866; Scientific Functions Management, supra, 176 Cal.Application.three dimensional within p. 891.)