Accused Ronald J. Ramos is attractive a judgment after the demonstration courtroom brought a decision in support of plaintiff House Government Coupons & Mortgage Connection (House Federal) out of Ramos’s liability with the a consumer loan warranty. I affirm.

Thomas Lynn, a major mortgage officer to own Family Government, negotiated the fresh arrangement with Brooks and you may prepared three documents-the mortgage amendment agreement, this new promissory mention in addition to [229 Cal

Offender Ramos is president of Ramos/Jensen Business (R/J Co.), a ca company. R/J Co. are all round mate regarding a limited partnership, the new Peacock Ridge Providers (Peacock), designed to accomplish the new Peacock Ridge build opportunity. Between September 1983 and you will February 1985, plaintiff Family Government loaned almost $seven.4 mil into Peacock commitment. Each one of the five operating system.

When this occurs, Peacock owed generous amounts for the accumulated focus together with almost every other obligations in connection with the project. House Government approved good “exercise contract” where it forgave just about $a hundred,one hundred thousand of the attract and you can agreed to loan Peacock a supplementary $50,100000. In exchange, Peacock promised to execute a good promissory mention to possess $150,100000 safeguarded by the your own guarantee closed because of the Ramos.

New work out agreement is actually discussed with respect to Peacock from the Arthur Brooks, a keen R/J Co. staff member. Application. three-dimensional 1612] personal guarantee-he delivered to Brooks with regards to acquiring Ramos’s trademark. Brooks came back all the three signed records to help you Lynn to the December 18, 1986.fn. step 1

The fresh new promissory note given a trademark line for “Ronald J. Ramos, President” regarding Roentgen/J Co. as general lover out of Peacock. Ramos closed the latest document “R.J. Ramos, Pres.” The private warranty incorporated another medical vocabulary:

Of the November 1986, financial hardships towards project brought about Peacock so you can standard towards the Household Government loans

“In the believe of loan regarding the Organization to help you Borrower, We, Ronald J. Ramos (Guarantor), positively and you may for any reason be sure and you can hope to invest to help you Relationship, otherwise whomever Connection purchases me to spend, any and all indebtedness out-of Borrower to help you Connection evidenced by, or even in any way payday loans Alamosa associated with the borrowed funds (together with however limited to most advances otherwise fund) or the notice, and also to create all the covenants and preparations regarding Borrower present in the fresh notice or any cover arrangement anywhere between Debtor and you can Association.” This new trademark line in the bottom of the file provided for this new trademark away from “Ronald J. Ramos.” As an alternative, Ramos finalized it he had signed the fresh new promissory note: “Roentgen.J. Ramos, Pres.”

Whenever Peacock defaulted towards new mention and Home Government delivered fit so you’re able to enforce the newest warranty, Ramos defended on the ground that their trademark because “Pres.” conveyed an intention so you’re able to join merely R/J Co. and not themselves myself into guaranty. At the close of all of the proof, the fresh trial judge provided Domestic Federal’s actions to own a led verdict, concluding it absolutely was bound by the fresh court’s decision in Sebastian Internationally, Inc. v. Peck (1987) 195 Cal. Software. three-dimensional 803 [240 Cal. Rptr. 911].

We start off with a phrase regarding proceeding pose of your own situation. The demo legal brought a decision facing Ramos, concluding there clearly was zero argument during the [229 Cal. App. three-dimensional 1613] the appropriate foundational research and you may trusting alone limited by an early on Legal regarding Focus choice. (Find basically Vehicle Guarantee Conversion, Inc. v. Superior Legal (1962) 57 Cal. 2d 450, 455 [20 Cal. Rptr. 321, 369 P.2d 937].) [2a] In the absence of a controlling appellate choice, although not, the new judge is actually best when you look at the determining you to definitely no jury question was displayed. While the Finest Judge informed me within the Parsons v. Bristol Development Co. (1965) 62 Cal. 2d 861 [forty-two Cal. Rptr. 767, 402 P.2d 839], “The translation regarding an authored device, whilst it comes to what can securely be entitled questions away from reality [citation], is basically an official form getting exercised according to the generally recognized canons away from translation and so the purposes of the new instrument is provided perception. . It is therefore exclusively an official function so you’re able to translate a written tool except if new translation transforms up on the latest trustworthiness of extrinsic facts.” (Id. at p. 865; come across also Scientific Procedures Government, Inc. v. National Wellness Laboratories, Inc. (1986) 176 Cal. App. three dimensional 886, 891-892 [222 Cal. Rptr. 455].) [2b] Here, due to the fact activities showed absolutely nothing related without conflicting extrinsic proof (come across Pacific Gasoline & E. Co. v. Grams.W. Thomas Drayage etc. Co. (1968) 69 Cal. 2d 33, 37 [69 Cal. Rptr. 561, 442 P.2d 641, forty A good.L.Roentgen.three-dimensional 1373]), the brand new trial courtroom securely would not fill in the fresh translation of the written warranty for the jury. (Look for Scientific Surgery Government, supra, 176 Cal.Software.three dimensional within p. 892, fn.4.) Simultaneously, not, we once the reviewing courtroom take into account the proof and you will interpret the new guaranty de- novo. (Parsons, supra, 62 Cal.2d within p. 866; Medical Functions Government, supra, 176 Cal.Application.three dimensional from the p. 891.)