Friday, September 11, 2009

Summary of Decision issued September 11, 2009

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: Lamar Outdoor Advertising v. Farmers Co-Op Oil Co. of Sheridan, WY

Citation: 2009 WY 112

Docket Number: S-08-0131

Appeal from the District Court of Sheridan County, the Honorable John G. Fenn, Judge.

Representing Appellant Lamar: Timothy M. Stubson of Brown, Drew & Massey, LLP, Casper, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee Farmers: Clint A. Langer of Davis & Cannon, LLP, Sheridan, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee Maverick Country Stores: Steven T. Waterman of Ray Quinney & Nebeker PC, Salt Lake City, Utah.

Facts/Discussion: During litigation among the parties concerning Lamar’s claim that other parties had not honored Lamar’s lease-based right of first refusal that provided Lamar the opportunity to purchase certain property upon which Lamar maintained an advertising sign, the parties executed a settlement agreement. Lamar appealed the district court’s summary judgment order that under the terms of the parties’ unambiguous settlement agreement Sheridan failed to act on Lamar’s variance application within eight weeks from the date the variance application was submitted and consequently, the parties remained bound by the terms of their settlement agreement.
Farmers and Maverik argued that Lamar submitted its variance application on August 2, 2006 which started the eight week clock as provided in the parties’ settlement agreement. The parties agree that Sheridan acted on Lamar’s application when it denied it on October 12, 2006. The eight week clock expired on October 2, 2006. Consequently, under the language of the parties’ agreement, the settlement agreement became fully binding.
Lamar relied upon the Mentock affidavit attached to its response. The Court determined the affidavit was insufficient. The affiant’s statement that he was “familiar with the matters set forth herein and they are true to the best of his knowledge, information and belief” did not meet the “personal knowledge” requirement. In addition, the applications for the variation and the required letter of notification to property owners were not attached to the affidavit.

Conclusion: The Court held that Farmers’ and Maverik’s argument prevailed and that Lamar’s argument had no evidentiary support.

Affirmed.

J. Golden delivered the decision.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/nyow52 .

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. Please note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you pinpoint cite to a quote, you should cite to this paragraph number rather than to any page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]

No comments:

Check out our tags in a cloud (from Wordle)!