Conner

Conner v. Conner

Good Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 1038·76 Cal. App. 4th 646·90 Cal. Rptr. 2d 687·99 Daily Journal DAR 12059·99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9385
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 30, 1999B128736California1,956 words

Opinion

Opinion

Yegan, J.

This case illustrates the venerable legal maxim of jurisprudence: “He who takes the benefit must bear the burden.” (Civ. Code, § 3521.) Appellant took the benefit of the bargain he made 10 years ago and now asks us to erase his name from a personally guaranteed note. We will not do so.

FM Conner and Cheryl A. Conner (FM) appeal from a $73,954.08 judgment entered in favor of respondents Billie G. Conner and Lola Fern Conner (Billie) on a promissory note. FM contends that the trial court erroneously found that Billie’s conduct as a creditor in a bankruptcy proceeding did not exonerate FM’s personal guarantee of the note. We affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

FM and Billie are brothers. They founded Magness Machine Co., Inc. (Magness), an Oxnard metal machining business. In 1990, Billie sold his stock to FM, Tommy Conner (FM’s son), and Magness. Magness gave Billie a $162,500 promissory note that provided for a 1998 balloon payment. FM personally guaranteed the note and executed a deed of trust on the real property in Oxnard as security.

Magness filed a chapter 11 bankruptcy petition in November 1996. The balance due on the $162,500 note was $48,380.08 but subject to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.