Bliss v. Minidoka Irrigation Dist.

• Decision Date: 15 July 2020
• Docket Number: Docket No. 46374
• Citation: 167 Idaho 141,468 P.3d 271
• Court: Idaho Supreme Court
• Parties: Victor Rodger BLISS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MINIDOKA IRRIGATION DISTRICT, Defendant-Respondent.

167 Idaho 141

468 P.3d 271

Victor Rodger BLISS, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.MINIDOKA IRRIGATION DISTRICT, Defendant-Respondent.

Docket No. 46374

Supreme Court of Idaho, Boise, April 2020 Term.

Opinion Filed: July 15, 2020

Evans, Grover & Beins, PC, Tremonton, Utah, for Appellant.

Hall Angell & Associates, LLP, Idaho Falls, for Respondent.

BURDICK, Chief Justice.

Victor Rodger Bliss appeals the district court's award of summary judgment in favor of the Minidoka Irrigation District ("MID"). Bliss filed a complaint against MID in April 2017, alleging (1) breach of contract, (2) breach of fiduciary duty; (3) trespass, (4) declaratory relief; and (5) wrongful prosecution/infliction of extreme emotional distress.

The complaint encompassed multiple events stemming from his decades-long relationship with MID. The district court granted MID's motion for summary judgment on all claims, dismissing Bliss's complaint for lack of notice under the Idaho Tort Claims Act, lack of standing, and failure to produce evidence. Bliss timely appealed. For the reasons below, we affirm.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Bliss owns roughly 76 acres of farmland within the service boundaries of MID. Since the year 2000, Bliss has leased his property to Alan and Debra Woodland, who farm the land and pay annual rent.

MID is an irrigation district organized under Title 43 of the Idaho Code. MID stores and delivers irrigation water to member properties. Each member has a head gate or valve at a point of diversion along MID's canals where the members obtain water for their property in coordination with a ditch rider employed by MID.

Bliss's diversion headgate takes water from a lateral ditch and pipes it to his irrigation pump. Four other water users take water from the same lateral ditch. Bliss's diversion headgate is the third diversion in line.

Downstream from Bliss's diversion headgate is a "check structure." The check structure exists to slow the water current within the lateral ditch so that adequate water levels are maintained for all users taking water from the ditch. The check structure features a headgate that can be raised and lowered to adjust the amount of water available in the shared lateral ditch. In addition to the check structure, the lateral ditch also has a "dirt plug" which is usually removed in the fall and replaced in the spring to control operational spills and help channel floodwater to a sump.

Sometime between 1998 and 2000, MID moved this lateral ditch so that it ran along Bliss's property. When MID excavated the area for the new placement of the canal, it deposited the displaced soil as an embankment. Bliss contends that the displaced soil partially covered and destroyed his boundary fence. MID claims that the soil was deposited within its right-of-way and any effect on Bliss's fence was minimal.

In the summer and fall of 2015, Bliss and MID's relationship soured and resulted in the exchange of letters that form the basis of this case.

In July 2015, Bliss sent MID an invoice ("Bliss's Invoice Letter") for $2,015 for time and expense he claimed he incurred in spraying noxious weeds where MID's lateral ditch adjoined his property. In the memo line, Bliss wrote that the bill was the result of MID's refusal to spray the weeds itself, informing MID that he would bill semiannually for his efforts to control the noxious weeds. The MID Board of Directors considered Bliss's Invoice Letter, but declined to pay it. In a response letter sent to Bliss, MID explained that it had not given prior authorization for the work and that Bliss had denied MID access to perform the work in the past.

After receiving MID's refusal, Bliss retained counsel and, through counsel, responded by letter in September 2015 ("Bliss's September Letter"). Bliss reiterated his demand that MID compensate him for removing the weeds. He further complained that "just recently" a lateral ditch had overflowed onto his crops "due to poor maintenance[.]" Bliss stated that "[a] request will be made for these repairs to MID's lateral ditch and resulting losses and costs in the near future," but that the damages were "in the process of being calculated." The MID Board again reviewed Bliss's letter and responded. The Board reiterated its stance on Bliss's Invoice Letter and stated that if Bliss believed that crops were damaged from MID's negligence, he should file a tort claim.

Bliss followed up with a "response and demand" in November 2015 ("Bliss's November Letter"). Bliss told MID that it had 30 days to pay the invoice before he would "initiat[e] legal action." Bliss also warned MID that he "will be pursing the flooding matter as a tort claim when all his information is gathered." Despite this ultimatum, Bliss did not initiate legal action once the 30 days passed.

Some seven months after Bliss's November Letter, in late June 2016, Bliss arranged a meeting with the Chairman of MID's Board, Frank Hunt. When the two met at Bliss's property, their conversation focused on Bliss's complaint that his water pump was unable to properly function because of low water levels in the lateral ditch. During the hours-long meeting, Bliss showed Hunt the check structure and voiced his belief that the low water levels were due to a faulty design of the check structure. Hunt agreed with Bliss that "it would be better if the ditch was fuller," but their conversation ended without any decisions regarding the water levels or the check structure being made.

At the time of their meeting, and for a period of time before the meeting, the check structure's diversion headgate was locked because, according to Hunt's testimony, MID "had problems with that diversion structure being tampered with and running downstream water users out of water."

However, later on the same evening as their meeting, Bliss called Hunt to complain that his pipe movers had shut off the pump because of the low water level. When Bliss asked Hunt what he should do, Hunt said something to the effect of "sounds like you need more water in the ditch." Hunt would later explain that he was implying that Bliss could "tweak" a headgate at the head of the canal—a practice common on the farms Hunt grew up on.

Evidently, the two misunderstood each other because the next morning, MID discovered that someone had cut the lock on the check structure and closed the headgate, cutting off water to downstream users. The person had also taken the lock, chain, and the wheel used to raise and lower the headgate. When Hunt called Bliss—believing him to be responsible—and asked him why he cut the lock, Bliss responded "I don't know anything about a lock and I have already talked to my attorney."

That same day, Vance Johnson, MID's assistant watermaster, spoke with other water users on the lateral ditch. The water users claimed to have witnessed Bliss, accompanied by his wife, cut the padlock and chain off the check structure. At MID's office, Johnson called Bliss on the telephone. When Johnson began asking about the check structure, Bliss began yelling at him. Johnson put Bliss on speakerphone and walked into various MID employees’ offices during Bliss's outburst. When Johnson asked Bliss if he had removed the lock and chain, Bliss said some variation of "Hell yeah I took it, and you're not getting it back."

MID reported the incident to the Minidoka County Sheriff's Office. MID's employees submitted voluntary statements, including both those who personally spoke with Bliss following the incident and those who had heard his outburst over speakerphone. Following an investigation, the Minidoka County Prosecutor's Office filed a misdemeanor complaint charging Bliss with wrongful diversion of water under Idaho Code section 18-4304. Bliss defended against these charges. Ultimately, Bliss paid $75.00 in restitution to MID and the charges were dismissed.

In late 2016, the MID Board of Directors visited the lateral ditch and Bliss's property to assess Bliss's complaints regarding the check structure. A few board members thought the check structure was suboptimal, describing it as "funny" or "a Mickey Mouse set up," but the Board never reached a consensus about whether a different structure would better serve the lateral ditch.

On February 28, 2017, Bliss sent a "Notice of Tort Claim" to MID through his attorney. Addressed specifically to MID's secretary, Ruth Bailes, the letter explicitly cited the Idaho Tort Claims Act and pinpointed MID's actions on June 30, 2016—namely contacting the Minidoka County Sheriff and submitting statements—as the conduct underlying his anticipated tort claim. Bliss asserted that this conduct led to the wrongful filing of a misdemeanor complaint and claimed two categories of damages. First, he claimed $4,430.16 in damages for attorney's fees to defend himself, lost time and income from work, and out-of-pocket expenses for travel and incidental expenses. Second, Bliss claimed that his "reputation and character were defamed and damaged with these false statements" in the sum of $50,000.

B. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On April 17, 2017, Bliss filed an unverified complaint against MID detailing five counts: (1) "breach of contract"; (2) "breach of fiduciary duty"; (3) "trespass"; (4) "declaratory relief"; (5) and "wrongful prosecution/infliction of extreme emotional distress".

In Count 1, Bliss alleged that he entered into a contract with MID "for the delivery of water" and that MID breached that contract by failing to deliver adequate water or maintain its water-delivery appurtenances.

In Count 2, Bliss alleged that MID owed him a fiduciary duty to deliver water, maintain its ditches in good repair, and construct and maintain a drainage system that reasonably avoided flooding. Bliss claimed that MID breached this duty by failing to (i) deliver adequate water, (ii) maintain and repair its ditches, and (iii) construct devices to prevent the natural or reasonable drainage flow of water from his property.

In Count 3, Bliss alleged that MID...