Opinion
Rehearing Denied Jan. 14, 1975.
Page 365
Samuel J. Eaton, Denver, for plaintiff-appellee.
Raymond S. Duitch, Colorado Springs, for defendant-appellant.
PIERCE, Judge.
Defendant Vale appeals from a judgment in favor of plaintiff Ransom Distributing Company (Ransom) based upon Vale's guaranty of the indebtedness of Lazy B. Ltd., d/b/a Furniture Ranch (Furniture Ranch) which was solely owned by Vale and his wife. We affirm.
Beginning early in 1972, Ransom supplied to Furniture Ranch the goods which form the basis for this suit. Some of the goods were delivered on open account; other goods were delivered on credit extended by Borg-Warner Acceptance Corporation (Borg-Warner), with Ransom as guarantor of Furniture Ranch's indebtedness to Borg-Warner.
Ransom's complaint pled three claims for relief, which respectively sought the recovery of: (1) $3060.58 allegedly owed to Ransom for goods delivered to Furniture Ranch on open account, (2) $10,000 which Ransom allegedly had paid to Borg-Warner pursuant to Ransom's guaranty of Furniture Ranch's indebtedness, and (3) $8894.80 allegedly owed, but not yet paid, by Ransom to Borg-Warner pursuant to Ransom's guaranty. Recovery was sought against Vale on the basis of a 'Continuing Guaranty' signed by Vale on October 6, 1970, in which Vale unconditionaly guaranteed to Ransom payment of all indebtedness 'heretofore, now or hereafter' incurred by Furniture Ranch.
After trial to the court, judgment was entered dismissing Ransom's third claim for relief, granting Ransom's first and second claims for relief, and awarding Ransom attorney's fees. On this appeal, Vale contends that the 'Continuing Guaranty' was not supported by consideration and therefore was only an offer of guaranteeship which terminated by lapse of time before acceptance.
A contract of guaranty, like other contracts, must be supported by consideration. Cripple Creek State Bank v. Rollestone, 70 Colo. 434, 202 P. 115; See Farmers Elevator Co. v. First National Bank, 30 Colo.App. 34, 488 P.2d 238. The trial court found that the guaranty of Vale for the debts of Furniture Ranch was given 'for a valuable consideration,' but did not specify what the consideration was. However, there was evidence from which the trial court could have concluded that Vale's guaranty was given in consideration of Ransom's promise to supply goods to Furniture Ranch on an 'open account' basis, or Ransom's promise to attempt to obtain a third party as financier for Furniture Ranch's inventory purchases from Ransom, or both. Therefore, the trial court's finding that Vale's promise of guaranteeship was given for valuable consideration is supported by the evidence, and will not be overturned on appeal. Linley v. Hanson, 173 Colo. 239, 477 P.2d 453. A 'Continuing Guaranty,' such as the one in this case, is not limited to a particular transaction or specific transactions but is intended to cover all future transactions. Valley National Bank v. Foreign Car Rental, Inc., 157 Colo. 545, 404 P.2d 272. The guaranty expressly applied to all indebtedness of Furniture Ranch incurred after the signing of the guaranty except 'any indebtedness created after actual receipt by (Ransom) of written notice of its revocation as to future transactions.' Vale testified at trial that he had never sent such written notice to Ransom. The trial court correctly concluded that the guaranty applied to the debt sued upon in this case.
Ransom's brief before this court contains an argument that dismissal of its third claim for relief was improper, but because Ransom did not file a motion for a new trial, that issue is not properly before us. C.R.C.P. 59(f).
Judgment affirmed.
SILVERSTEIN, C.J., and COYTE, J., concur.