Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Budget Truck Sales, LLC v. Tilley

Supreme Court of Idaho, Boise

April 20, 2018

BUDGET TRUCK SALES, LLC, a limited liability company, Plaintiff-Counterdefendant-Appellant,
v.
KENT H. TILLEY, Defendant-Counterclaimant-Respondent. KENT H. TILLEY, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
BREK A. PILLING and BRIAN TIBBETTS, Defendants-Appellants. BREK A. PILLING, an individual, Plaintiff-Counterdefendant-Appellant,
v.
KENT H. TILLEY, Defendant-Counterclaimant-Respondent. KENT H. TILLEY, Third Party Claimant,
v.
JIM COTTOM and HIGH MARK RENTALS, LLC, Third Party Defendants.

         2018 Opinion No. 37

          Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District of the State of Idaho, Cassia County. Hon. Robert J. Elgee, District Judge.

         The judgment of the district court is vacated and remanded for proceedings consistent with this Opinion. Costs on appeal are awarded to Appellant.

          Worst, Fitzgerald & Stover, PLLC, Boise, for Appellant. David W. Gadd argued.

          Gjording Fouser, PLLC, Boise, for Respondent. Bobbi K. Dominick argued.

          BEVAN, JUSTICE.

         This is 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 further proceedings.

         I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         Approximately six years ago, the Budget Parties, including Mike Tilley, [1] and 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[2], 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 consolidated.

         Trial 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.

         Before the parties placed the terms of the settlement on the record, the Budget Parties allege[3] 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 settlement.

         Once 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 final.[4]

         In 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.

         On 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 settlement agreement.

         A 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.

         On 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.

         II. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.