Bauman v. Castle
California Court of Appeal
15 Cal. App. 3d 990 (1971)
- Written by Daniel Clark, JD
Facts
Cornelius and Elena Gillespie bought an apartment from Robert and Eileen Gronachon. The Gillespies issued a promissory note secured by a second deed of trust on the apartment to the Gronachons to cover a portion of the purchase price. The note was assigned several times, with the final assignment to John Bauman (plaintiff). William Dias, Samuel Stewart, and Edward Castle (guarantors) (defendants) executed a written guaranty to Bauman on the note. After the Gillespies defaulted, Bauman held a nonjudicial foreclosure sale of the apartment, but the foreclosure proceeds did not cover all outstanding debt on the note. Bauman sued the guarantors to cover the difference. The trial court initially held in favor of Bauman but later issued a revised decision, finding that the California Court of Appeal’s earlier decision in Union Bank v. Gradsky compelled judgment in favor of the guarantors. Bauman appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Shoemaker, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 777,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
