Summary 2012 WY 42
Summary of Decision March 20, 2012
[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. 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: Daren S. Berg and Jennifer A. Berg v. Torrington Livestock Cattle Company, a Wyoming Corporation
Docket Number: S-11-0229
Appeal from the District Court of Goshen County, Honorable John C. Brooks, Judge
Representing Appellant (Plaintiff/Defendant): Daren S. Berg and Jennifer A. Berg, Pro se, Edgemont, SD.
Representing Appellee (Plaintiff/Defendant): Patrick J. Crank of Nicholas & Crank, P.C., Cheyenne, WY.
Date of Decision: March 20, 2012
Facts: Daren S. Berg and Jennifer A. Berg (the Bergs) filed this pro se appeal from summary judgment entered against them in an action to collect on a promissory note.
Issues: Ten arguments are listed by the Bergs:
1. The district court erred in denying Bergs their preserved right to a jury trial.
2. The district court erred in holding that there was no breech [sic] of contract against Torrington Livestock Cattle Company.
3. The district court erred in holding secured collateral on a promissary [sic] note did not have to be apllied [sic] to the actual note.
4. The district court failed on all counts to prove or provide any evidence of the Bergs hindering or delaying Torrington Livestock Cattle Company.
5. The district court erred in allowing perjured statements.
6. The district court continiuosly [sic] proved they were biased against the Bergs and denied them of their Constitutional and Civil rights.
7. Does the district court have the authority to dictate where a business or individuals may conduct business or financial transactions?
8. The district court erred in its ruling on the bank security agreement.
9. Torrington Livestock Cattle Company has received $103,151.71 in payment on a bank note that only had a balance of $53,569.60. This was low value auction prices.
10. Gross negligence on behalf of the Goshen County Sheriff’s department should be filed for the seizure and then losing Bergs’ property. The department failed to provide accurate records and secure the property until it was sold.
Holdings: Based upon the deficient brief offered by the Bergs and their failure to follow the rules of appellate procedure, the decision of the trial court is summarily affirmed.
Justice Hill delivered the opinion for the court.
No comments:
Post a Comment