Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, in Its Corporate Capacity v. Woodside Construction, Inc., an Alaska Corporation

This case arose when Donald Galt signed a deed of trust note twice and signed a contract of guaranty twice. The FDIC claims that Galt is liable for $912,000, first because he signed the note as an endorser or, alternately, because he signed the contract of guaranty as a guarantor. Galt claims that all of his signatures were in a representative capacity and that he did not sign individually as an endorser or as a guarantor. The FDIC maintains that one of the signatures on the note and one of the signatures on the contract of guaranty were signed in Galt’s individual capacity, making him liable as an endorser on the note or, alternately, as guarantor on the contract of guaranty. The district court granted summary judgment for Galt on both the endorsement issue and the guaranty issue. The district court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 , and we have appellate jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We reverse. Because we find Galt liable as an endorser on the note, we do not address the issue of Galt’s liability on the guaranty.

I.

Galt obtained a loan from Alaska Mutual Bank for $912,000 on behalf of Woodside Construction of which he was an officer. The loan was evidenced by…