BUDGET TRUCK SALES, LLC, a limited liability company, Plaintiff-Counterdefendant-Appellant,
KENT H. TILLEY, Defendant-Counterclaimant-Respondent. KENT H. TILLEY, Plaintiff-Respondent,
BREK A. PILLING and BRIAN TIBBETTS, Defendants-Appellants. BREK A. PILLING, an individual, Plaintiff-Counterdefendant-Appellant,
KENT H. TILLEY, Defendant-Counterclaimant-Respondent. KENT H. TILLEY, Third Party Claimant,
JIM COTTOM and HIGH MARK RENTALS, LLC, Third Party Defendants.
Opinion No. 37
from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District of the
State of Idaho, Cassia County. Hon. Robert J. Elgee, District
judgment of the district court is vacated and remanded for
proceedings consistent with this Opinion. Costs on appeal are
awarded to Appellant.
Fitzgerald & Stover, PLLC, Boise, for Appellant. David W.
Gjording Fouser, PLLC, Boise, for Respondent. Bobbi K.
an appeal out of Cassia County from a judgment enforcing a
settlement agreement between Kent Tilley ("Tilley")
and Budget Truck Sales, LLC, Brek A. Pilling, Brian L.
Tibbets, and Mike Tilley (the "Budget Parties").
The Budget Parties appealed alleging that the parties'
settlement agreement was void because it was procured by
fraud. According to the Budget Parties, Tilley proposed to
convey title to a CAT 950 front loader (the
"loader"), but Tilley misrepresented the
loader's condition. We vacate the judgment and remand for
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
six years ago, the Budget Parties, including Mike Tilley,
Tilley entered into various oral agreements relating to the
purchase, repair and sale of large trucks and heavy
equipment. Shortly thereafter, the relationship of the
parties broke down, leading to the filing of three separate
lawsuits: Cassia County Case Nos. CV-2012-1257, CV-2013-316, and
CV-2015-719 (the "Cassia County Cases"). On April
9, 2013, Budget Truck Sales, LLC filed a lawsuit against
Tilley, alleging that Tilley owed it money on an open account
for loans it had provided to Tilley. On August 17, 2015,
Tilley filed a lawsuit against Brek A. Pilling and Brian L.
Tibbits, alleging they personally owed him for his share of
the profits. On October 8, 2015, pursuant to an order by the
district court, Case Nos. CV-2013-316 and CV-2015-719 were
started for the consolidated cases on December 13, 2016. By
the second day of trial, the parties engaged in settlement
negotiations to resolve each of the Cassia County Cases.
During the negotiations, Tilley proposed to convey certain
property to the Budget Parties, including title to a CAT 950
front loader, in exchange for $100, 000. The $100, 000 was to
be paid the day after delivery.
the parties placed the terms of the settlement on the record,
the Budget Parties allege that Steven McRae ("McRae"),
counsel for the Budget Parties at the time, asked Tilley,
with his counsel's permission, what condition the loader
was in. According to McRae, Tilley stated that, "with
the exception of a minor hydraulics issue that [Tilley] would
correct, " the loader "worked great" and
"was in great working condition." McRae shared
these statements with the Budget Parties, and they agreed to
the parties reached a resolution that would resolve all of
the Cassia County Cases, the parties recited the terms of
their agreement on the record in open court. After the terms
were recited, the court asked each party and their attorneys
if they stipulated to those terms, emphasizing that the
Cassia County Cases would be settled on those terms, and
whatever they agreed to on the record was
accordance with the settlement agreement, the loader was
delivered to the Budget Truck Sales' lot on January 11,
2017. However, the Budget Parties claimed the loader was not
in "great working condition, " as Tilley had
allegedly represented. In fact, the Budget Parties claimed
the loader was inoperable. Because the loader's condition
was not as Tilley had allegedly represented, the Budget
Parties refused to pay Tilley the $100, 000 that was due the
following day. On January 12, 2017, Tilley's attorney
referred McRae to the agreement, advised him that if the
$100, 000 payment was not received the next day a motion to
enforce the settlement agreement would be filed, and Tilley
would seek an award of attorney fees. On January 13, 2017,
McRae informed Tilley's counsel that the Budget Parties
would not honor the agreement because they believed Tilley
had misrepresented the condition of the loader, and the
Budget Parties relied upon that representation when they
agreed to the settlement.
January 23, 2017, Tilley filed a motion to enforce the
settlement agreement, arguing that the Budget Parties agreed
to be bound by the terms of the agreement and that they could
not add to those terms. The Budget Parties opposed the
motion, arguing that the central focus of the district
court's analysis should be Tilley's misrepresentation
of the loader's condition. Moreover, because Tilley
denied making the representation, the Budget Parties argued,
genuine issues of material fact precluded enforcement of the
hearing was held on the motion on February 6, 2017. The
district court, without holding an evidentiary hearing,
ordered as a matter of law that the agreement provided in
open court was enforceable, ultimately finding that fraud in
the inducement did not apply to the facts of this case. The
court further held that the settlement agreement should be
reduced to a judgment.
February 14, 2017, the Budget Parties filed an objection to
the proposed judgment. A hearing was held on April 17, 2017.
At that time, the court made a finding that the settlement
agreement was absolute and not conditional, and that the
condition of the loader was not a material term of the
settlement. The remaining findings of fact were based upon
the settlement terms placed on the record. A judgment was
entered on May 2, 2017. On May 3, 2017, the Budget Parties
timely filed a notice of appeal.