Summary 2011 WY 29

Summary of Decision February 18, 2011

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it is issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. You will also note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you need to provide a pinpoint citation to a quote the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number. The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion will need to have the reporter page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation from this, or any future opinion using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library and we will provide any needed assistance]

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

Case Name: Davidson Land Company, LLC v. Davidson

Citation: 2011 WY 29

Docket Number: S-10-0060

URL: http://wyomcases.courts.state.wy.us/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=461773

Appeal from the District Court of Carbon County, Honorable Wade E. Waldrip, Judge

Representing Appellant (Plaintiff): C.M. Aron of Aron and Hennig, , Laramie Wyoming.

Representing Appellees Suellen L. Davidson and Charles Noller Davidson (Defendants): Alexander K. Davison of Patton & Davison, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee Deborah J. Davidson (Defendant): Greg Weisz and Megan Overmann Goetz of Pence & MacMillan, Laramie, Wyoming.

Date of Decision: February 18, 2011

Facts: Two brothers, Daniel Davidson and Chester Davidson, agreed to partition their ranch in 1982. In recognition of a railroad right of way that traversed the ranch, they provided in their agreement that if the right of way were ever abandoned, they would execute any necessary documents to vest the other with full title in the right of way over his respective portion of ranch. Later, Daniel purchased a quitclaim deed to the right of way from the Union Pacific Railroad Company (UPRR), and his successors refuse to execute documents to fully vest Chester’s successors with title to the right of way over Chester’s portion of the ranch. The district court granted summary judgment and quieted title in property covered by the railroad right of way to Daniel’s successors on the basis of the quitclaim deed. Chester’s successors claim the district court incorrectly interpreted the terms of the parties’ agreement. .


Issues: Are Appellees required to transfer any of the right-of-way to Appellant under the terms of the agreement or warranty deed.

Holdings: The district court erred as a matter of law when it quieted title to the land within the right of way in parcels three and four to Daniel’s successors. Daniel and Chester Davidsons’ clear intent in the 1982 Agreement and warranty deeds was to convey all the interest they had in the land within the railroad right of way to the party who received the adjacent property and to execute the appropriate documents in the future when and if the right of way was abandoned to fully vest title in the adjoining property owner. For purposes of the 1982 Agreement, UPRR abandoned its right of way when it executed the quitclaim deed. Chester’s successors are, therefore, entitled to specific performance of the agreement, and Daniel’s successors are obligated to convey whatever interest they received from UPRR in parcels three and four to Chester’s successors.

Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

C.J. Kite delivered the opinion for the court.