Assignment of An Underlying Guaranty
In Ashcraft v. Lookadoo, 952 S.W.2d 907 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1997) the appellate court rejected the creditor's proposition that assignment of a note automatically assigns an underlying guaranty. See id.
The court refused to imply a transfer of the guaranty and examined the facts to see if the assignee had established ownership. See id. at 913.
The guaranty was not in the asset file that conveyed the note, and the assignee did not possess the guaranty, could not produce the original, or prove that the defendant had ever signed the original. See id. at 912-13. the copy of the guaranty was not specific to the note in question, and the assignee produced no evidence that the transferor of the note ever owned a valid guaranty capable of being assigned. See id. at 911-13.
The appellate court found that those facts supported the trial court's finding that assignee failed to prove that he was the owner of the guaranty. See id. at 913-14.