WPC {Iℾx7ЗA_Y&C^[Z/,ۻA1~3k2m҉)Z Se@c7:\y-5UmYx81 YrT.6AQ02TiejQ2hZ#5ma"FLJ{ EOcW H3Ax6F- yL=WCtB ^dS%׎[)2`0D0 0 0 0 1 1z 1z 1z 1 0 0 50q h0` }0, 0 c0 F0 / / / / s/ c/ +/ +/ / / / / / ;/ O/< |/< |/ . .P m.P m.P m. .. W.{ . #/ U///- - 0#Xd#   ""  XXXXXX   Ad FILEDXX  November25,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAh ,cAZ"Arial Regular!"T$&C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  ($$   1  ((' dxd dP Pd'''''dxd(3$ !  T^y  <<= 8C____3 TripledxdCTriple 1+| d d d !  ݛ 1XX'XDXX'll   4TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'Tќwwwmmr )<,(j 8` `@E` 8ttxP,  rwmmCREATIVERESOURCE D )  wwMANAGEMENT,INC.,   D )    0      D )wt )>.*jx@` `@E4` 8ttxPl tߛw Plaintiff/Appellant, D )   @ AppealNo. 0   0      D )   @ 01A019808CH00016 @ v.  0      D )  P   0      D )   @ DavidsonChancery  ` BARRYSOSKIN,etal,   D )   @ No.964024III  p   0      D ) Defendants/Appellees. D )   @    COURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEAPPEALFROMTHEDAVIDSONCOUNTYCHANCERYCOURTATNASHVILLE,TENNESSEETHEHONORABLEELLENHOBBSLYLE,CHANCELLOR  WINSTONS.EVANSPHILLIPBYRONJONESEvans,Jones&Reynolds1810FirstUnionTower150FourthAvenue,NorthNashville,Tennessee37219 ATTORNEYSFORPLAINTIFF/APPELLANTTHORY.URNESSJULIEC.MURPHYBoult,Cummings,Conners&Berry414UnionStreet,Suite1600P.O.Box198062Nashville,Tennessee37219 ATTORNEYSFORDEFENDANTS/APPELLEES  REVERSEDANDREMANDED  m 47XXdXXd7    4#Xd#    mWILLIAMB.CAIN,JUDGE :066w  47XXdXXd7   m 47dXXdXXd7   m   1OPINION      1CreativeResourceManagement,Inc.appealsasummaryjudgmentgranted p inthetrialcourttotheindividualdefendant,BarrySoskin. Thedefendant,NashvilleProHockey,LLC,wasaLimitedLiabilityCompanyunderthelawsofTennessee,withpersonalliabilityofofficers,members,andotheragentslimitedbyTennesseeCodeAnnotatedsection48217101. CreativeResourceManagement,Inc.wasacorporationunderthelawsofSouthCarolinaqualifiedtodobusinessinTennessee. BarrySoskinwaspresidentofNashvilleProHockey,LLCwhichownedtheNashvilleNighthawks,aminorleagueprofessionalhockeyteam. OnSeptember4,1996,NashvilleProHockey,LLCcontractedwithCreativeResourceManagement,Inc.wherebyCRM,forfeesandotherconsiderationssetforthinthecontract,providedemployeeleasingservicestoNashvilleProHockey,LLC.ThiscontractprovidedinsectionXI(f):"Inthebodyofthecontractthepronouns'we'and'you'referto'CRM'andthe'client'respectively." ThecontractfurtherprovidedinparagraphVII(d):"Byaffixingmyhandandsealtothisagreement,Ipersonallyguaranteeanyandallpaymentspayableasrepresentedandoutlinedinthisagreementincludingbutnotlimitedtopayrolls,taxes(stateandfederal),insurancepremiums,andallotherfeesaforementionedinparagraphVII." BarrySoskinsignedthecontractforthe"client"NashvilleProHockey,LLC.ThomasH.DemosssignedthecontractforCreativeResourceManagement,Inc.Thesesignaturesarereproducedasfollows: 8(4@ М̛ NashvilleProHockey,LLCfailedowingCreativeResourceManagement,Inc.$29,626.41. CreativeResourceManagementbroughtsuitagainstNashvilleProHockey,LLCandcertainofitsofficersincludingBarrySoskin. ThecomplaintchargedSoskinasaguarantorunderthetermsoftheagreementandthusindividuallyliableforNashvilleProHockey,LLCdebtfor$29,626.41. Bothpartiesfiledmotionsforsummaryjudgment,andafterhearing,thetrialcourtgrantedthemotionforsummaryjudgmentofBarrySoskin,therebyholdingthathissignatureonthecontractwasinarepresentativecapacityonlyandnotinhisindividualcapacity. TheonlyissueonappealiswhetherornotBarrySoskinsignedthecontractonlyinacorporatecapacityandnotasaguarantor. WeconcludefromthelanguageoftheinstrumentitselfthatBarrySoskinisaguarantorandisliableonhisguaranty. Firstofall,aspecificprovisionofthecontractprovidesthatthepronouns"we"and"you"referspecificallyto"CRM"(CreativeResourceManagement,Inc.)and"client"(NashvilleProHockey,LLC). Thecontractcontainsnospecifiedmeaningoftheterms"myhand"and"I"assameappearinparagraphVII(d). H94B Ї Indeed,thewellsettledprecedentinTennesseesuggeststhatacorporateofficer'ssignaturepreceededbyacorporation'snameandfollowedbyadesignationofthesigner'scorporatecapacityisevidencethatthesignerwasactingasanagentofthecorporationratherthanindividually. SeeBillWalker&Assoc., x  Inc.v.Parrish ,770S.W.2d764,770(Tenn.App.1988); Andersonv.Davis ,34  c Tenn.App.116,120,234S.W.2d368,36970(1950).Thisrule,however,mustyieldwherethelanguageofthecontractcompelsadifferentconclusion. Bill F  Walker&Assoc.v.Parrish ,770S.W.2d764(Tenn.Ct.App.1989). 1   Thelanguageofthecontractinvolvedinthecaseatbardistinguishesthiscasefromthegeneralrule.Thiscaseconcernsacontractwhichcontainspersonalguaranteelanguageinthebodyofthecontract.  󀀛 ,  Thewords"Ipersonallyguaranteeanyandallpaymentspayableasrepresentedandoutlinedinthisagreement..."assameappearinparagraphVII(d)ofthecontractreflectindisputablyaguaranteebysomeone.Soskininsiststhathesignedonlyasarepresentativeofthelimitedliabilitycompany.CRMinsiststhathissignatureimposespersonalliabilityuponhim. Thiscourthasheldthattheverynatureofaguaranteeistheobligationofaguarantorinadditiontotheobligationtobesecured. Villinesv.Parham $( LindseyGroc.Co. ,6Tenn.App.254(1927). :&!*   "Aguarantyobligatingonlythecorporationwouldnotinanywayaddsecuritytotheobligationofthecorporation,becausethecorporationwasalreadyfullyobligatedasprincipal." ConeOilCo.,Inc.v.Green ,669S.W.2d662,664 ,'2 (Tenn.Ct.App.1983). The Cone courtconcludesthat"...aguarantyofone'sownobligationis h1,8 anexerciseinfutility."669S.W.2d662,664(Tenn.Ct.App.1983). Cone findsstrongsupportinotherjurisdictions.In Kordickv.Merchants 361> NationalBank&TrustCo.ofIndianapolis ,496N.E.2d119,theIndianaCourt 73@ ofAppealswascalledupontodeterminewhetherornotthesignatureofNicholas i94B Kordickas"president"boundhimpersonallyasguarantorofthedebtofhiscorporation"Fortune".ThecorporationdefaultedandbankruptedandthebankbroughtsuitagainstKordickindividuallyontheguarantee.Relyingon Royv. 0 DavidsonEquipment ,423So.2d496(Fl.App.1982),the Kordick courtheld: {  8 Inthecaseathand,itwouldlikewisebemeaninglessforFortunetoguaranteeitsowndebtbecauseitwouldaddnothingtotheexistingobligationtoMerchants.Moreover,theguarantyobligationwasnotaffectedbythereleaseoftheindebtednessoftheborrowerFortuneτanobviousparadoxifFortuneweretheguarantor.Thus,wemustconcludethelanguageoftheguarantyspecificallynegatesthesignatureashavingbeenmadeinarepresentativecapacity,andKordickwaspersonallyobligatedontheguarantyagreement.  ! ! 496N.E.2d119,124ll(Ind.App.1986). Othercasesapplyingthesameruleare Beradiv.HardwareWholesalers, & Inc. ,625N.E.2d1259(Ind.Ct.App.1993); Royv.DavidsonEquipment,Inc. , q 423So.2d496(Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1982); Rickerv.BWAcceptanceCorp. ,349  \ F.2d892(10thCir.1965)and Dannv.TeamBank ,788S.W.2d182(Tex.App.  1990). Ineachoftheforegoingcasestheguarantyagreementwasconsiderablymoredetailedthantheguarantyagreementinthiscasebutthestarkfactisthatthewords"Ipersonallyguarantee"aremeaninglessifappliedtoNashvilleProHockey,LLCandnottoBarrySoskinindividually.Wewouldsimplyhaveanother Cone "exerciseinfutility". '"#(  Mr.Soskinattemptstoarguethattheplacementoftheguaranteelanguageissomehowdeceptiveinthatitappearsinthebodyofthecontractasopposedtotheendoftheagreementneartheparties'signatures.Inthecaseatbarwedonotfindthelocationofthepersonalguarantylanguageinappropriate.TheguarantylanguageofparagraphVII(d)isnotinconspicuousandhiddenbutratherinthesameformatasalloftheotherprovisionsofthecontract. OneStopSupply,Inc. 2M.6 v.Ransdell ,1996WL187576(Tenn.Ct.App.1996).Partieswhosigncontracts 4/8 arepresumedtoknowthecontentsofthedocumentstheysign. SeeBeasleyv. 361: MetropolitanLifeIns.Co., 190Tenn.227,232,229S.W.2d146,148(1950); 73<  DeFordv.NationalLife&AccidentIns.Co., 182Tenn.255,166,185S.W.2d i94> 617,62122(1945). "Thelawimputestocontractingpartiesanintentioncorrespondingtothereasonablemeaningoftheirwordsandacts.i iSuttonv.FirstNationalBankof x  Crossvillei i,620S.W.2d526,530(Tenn.Ct.App.1981)ccc.c" ddBillWalker&Assoc.  ` v.Parrish ,770S.W.2d764,770(Tenn.Ct.App.1989).    ̜ Inaddition,courtsmustconsidertheentirecontractwhendeterminingthemeaningofitsterms. SeeCockeCountyBd.ofHighwayComm'rsv.Newport v  Utils.Bd., 690S.W.2d231,237(Tenn.1985).Wemaynotignoreany a contractualprovisions,givingcontractualtermstheirnaturalandordinarymeaninge,efs,fgandgconstruingprovisionsharmoniouslyinordertogiveeffecttoallprovisionsandavoidingthecreationofinternalconflicts. SeeWilsonv.Moore , , 929S.W.2d367,373(Tenn.App.1996).̛ Sincethewords"Ipersonallyguarantee"cannotrefertoNashvilleProHockey,LLCandretainanymeaningatallinthecontextofthisagreement,theymustofnecessityreflectthepersonalguaranteeofBarrySoskin. ThejudgmentofthetrialcourtisreversedandsummaryjudgmentgrantedtoCreativeResourceManagement,Inc.h,hagainstDefendantBarrySoskin.Thecaseisremandedtothetrialcourtforfurtherproceedingswithcostsassessedtotheappellant.Ӏ  0      D ________________________________  0      D XdXWILLIAMB.CAIN,JUDGE +&0 МCONCUR:̜kk__________________________________WILLIAMC.KOCH,JR.,JUDGE̜jj__________________________________̜HENRYF.TODD,JUDGE