Summary 2013 WY 105

Summary of Decision September 13, 2013

Justice Voigt delivered the opinion for the Court. Affirmed.

Case Name: JEFFREY BARNES and SHERRIE BARNES v. MELISSA COONEY, VAL
PENDLETON, and COLDWELL BANKER COUNTRY ESTATES

Docket Number: S-13-0024

URL: http://www.courts.state.wy.us/Opinions.aspx

Appeal from the District Court of Lincoln County the Honorable Dennis L. Sanderson, Judge

Representing Appellant: William R. Fix, William R. Fix, P.C., Jackson, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee: Matthew E. Turner, Mullikin, Larson & Swift LLC, Jackson, Wyoming.

Date of Decision: September 13, 2013

Facts: The appellants purchased a home in Lincoln County, Wyoming. Dissatisfied with some aspects of the construction and purchase of the home, the appellants sued a development company, the building contractor, the real estate agency involved in the transaction, a real estate agent, and, eventually, the real estate broker. The appellants alleged breach of contract, breach of express warranty, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, promissory estoppel, fraud in the inducement, professional malpractice, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligence. The defendants, some of whom are now the appellees in this appeal, filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, which motion was granted by the district court. This appeal followed.

Holdings: We will summarily affirm the district court’s ruling because the appellant’s brief fails in all respects to meet the requirements of W.R.A.P. 7.01(e)(2) and (f). The brief contains a statement of the standard of review, along with lengthy deposition excerpts. Beyond that, however, it is void of any factual analysis, cogent legal argument, or citation to pertinent authority that might enlighten this Court as to how the appellants were damaged by any conduct of the appellees. In addition to summarily affirming the district court, this Court will also, pursuant to W.R.A.P. 10.05, certify that there exists no discernible cause for this appeal, and will impose costs and attorney’s fees against the appellants, in favor of the appellees consistent with that rule. The appellees shall file an appropriate certificate of costs and attorney’s fees within fifteen days from the publication of this opinion. The resolution of this case in this manner should come as no surprise. This Court has a long history of rejecting deficient briefs and imposing sanctions where appropriate. Affirmed.

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

[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]

Summary 2010 WY 71

Summary of Decision issued June 1, 2010

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

Case Name: Comeau v. Nash

Citation: 2010 WY 71

Docket Number: S-09-0075

Appeal from the District Court of Uinta County, the Honorable Dennis L. Sanderson, Judge.

Representing Comeau: Sharon M. Rose of Lavery & Rose, PC, Evanston, Wyoming.

Representing Nash: A. Anthony Vehar of Vehar Law Firm, Evanston, Wyoming.

Facts/Discussion: Comeau challenged the district court’s factual findings and legal conclusions to the effect that Comeau breached a fiduciary duty he owed to Kenneth McGrath (McGrath). McGrath is deceased and Comeau is one of his heirs.

The principal parties, Comeau and Nash, were once married to each other. Nash is McGrath’s granddaughter. Comeau and McGrath remained close after Comeau and Nash’s divorce. Eventually, McGrath came to live with Comeau and his wife as his health deteriorated. Comeau’s wife was a nurse experienced in caring for the elderly. McGrath lived modestly so his family did not know of his actual wealth (approximately $300,000 in cash and he owned property as well). By the time of McGrath’s death, Comeau had come into possession of almost all of McGrath’s assets except for land in Florida. Comeau’s possession did not reflect the testamentary intentions evinced by McGrath’s last Will and Testament.
Comeau had been appointed as McGrath’s guardian after his doctor determined he was unable to make his own determinations and sign his own authorizations and forms.
The Court has held that courts should zealously scrutinize deed transactions between people in confidential relationships. The Court made note of McGrath’s experience as a banker. Because McGrath lived with and was dependent upon the Comeaus, the district court found that they had the opportunity to “control” McGrath. The district court held that Nash’s evidence proved an opportunity to control; a condition permitting subversion; activity on the part of Comeau and a benefit to Comeau. To the extent that Comeau contended that McGrath had made a gift of his assets to him, the district court concluded that Comeau failed to bear his burden of proof.

Conclusion: The district court’s finding that McGrath was susceptible to undue influence was not clearly erroneous. The district court’s finding that Comeau exercised actual control and undue influence over McGrath was not clearly erroneous. The district court’s conclusion that Comeau breached a fiduciary duty was not clearly erroneous

Affirmed.

J. Hill delivered the decision.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/2e6axg8 .

[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 using the Universal Citation format, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]