Financial Corp. of America v. Prudential Carbon & Ribbon Co.

I dissent, suggesting that as to the defendant Bluth, the main opinion is dead wrong.

*242Bluth’s inked name on a purported guaranty obviously was not his signature. No effort to prove otherwise appears in this record. The thrust of the main opinion is that Bluth permitted someone to sign his name and hence he is estopped to deny the obligation. There is no competent, substantial evidence to support this conclusion. The only thing that might come close is some self-serving hearsay testimony elicited by some finder’s fee merchants. There is no evidence of any amanuensis relationship created by…