Boyne USA, Inc. v. Spanish Peaks Dev., LLC
| Decision Date | 02 January 2013 |
| Docket Number | No. DA 12–0094.,DA 12–0094. |
| Citation | 368 Mont. 143,292 P.3d 432 |
| Parties | BOYNE USA, INC., Plaintiff and Appellee, v. SPANISH PEAKS DEVELOPMENT, LLC, Lone Mountain Holdings, LLC and John Does 1–5, Defendants and Appellants. |
| Court | Montana Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
For Appellants: Stephen R. Brown; Charles E. McNeil; Elena J. Zlatnik; Garlington, Lohn & Robinson, PLLP, Missoula, MT.
For Appellee: David M. Wagner, Crowley Fleck PLLP, Bozeman, MT.Justice BRIAN MORRIS delivered the Opinion of the Court.
[368 Mont. 144]¶ 1 Boyne USA, Inc. (Boyne) filed an action for breach of contract against Blixseth Group, Inc. that covered a land sale for 15 acres of property on Lone Peak in Madison County, Montana. Boyne sought specific performance. Boyne joined Yellowstone Mountain Club, LLC as a party due to Yellowstone Mountain Club's acquisition of the contested property.
¶ 2 Yellowstone Mountain Club purportedly conveyed the contested 15–acre Lone Peak property to Spanish Peaks Development, LLC (SPD). Boyne joined SPD as a party. SPD, in turn, conveyed the 15–acre Lone Peak property to Lone Mountain Holdings, LLC (LMH). Boyne joined LMH as a party. Boyne further alleged abuse of the legal process and deceit. The District Court dismissed Blixseth Group and Yellowstone Mountain Club from the case on January 15, 2010, due to Yellowstone Mountain Club's bankruptcy.
¶ 3 The jury awarded Boyne $300,000 from each defendant based on its determination that SPD and LMH had deceived Boyne and had abused the legal process. The District Court awarded Boyne specific performance on the Peak Agreement. The District Court also awarded attorney fees to Boyne. SPD and LMH appeal and we affirm subject to one minor modification. ( See ¶ 70). We will refer to SPD and LMH collectively as “Appellants” when we address their claims on appeal.
¶ 4 Appellants raise the following issues on appeal:
¶ 5 1. Whether the District Court properly awarded specific performance to Boyne.
¶ 6 2. Whether the jury properly awarded compensatory damages to Boyne.
¶ 7 3. Whether the District Court properly awarded legal fees to Boyne pursuant to the terms of the contract.
¶ 8 4. Whether Boyne is entitled to legal fees on appeal.
¶ 9 The dizzying array of land transfers, assignments, and corporate metamorphoses leads us to prepare a program to identify the players:
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦Blixseth's & McDougal brothers' entities; ¦
¦BLS ¦owned checker-boarded land that it exchanged ¦
¦ ¦with the U.S. for the Lone Peak property; ¦
¦ ¦entered into the Peak Agreement with Boyne. ¦
+-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------¦
¦Yellowstone Mountain Club ¦Entity managed by Dolan & Blixseth; owned the¦
¦ ¦Lone Peak property and transferred it to SPD.¦
+-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------¦
¦Spanish Peaks Development (SPD)¦Entity managed by Dolan and Blixseth. ¦
+-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------¦
¦Spanish Peaks Holding (SPH) ¦Entity owned by SPD; managed by Dolan and ¦
¦ ¦Blixseth. ¦
+-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------¦
¦ ¦Entity owned and managed by Dolan and his ¦
¦Lone Mountain Holdings (LMH) ¦family; purchased the Lone Peak property from¦
¦ ¦SPD. ¦
+-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------¦
¦ ¦Boyne receives Lone Peak land in return for 4¦
¦ ¦items of consideration that included transfer¦
¦Peak Agreement ¦of land under the Southfork Agreement. Boyne ¦
¦ ¦entered into the Peak Agreement with BLS; BLS¦
¦ ¦transferred its rights to SPD. ¦
+-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------¦
¦ ¦Boyne transfers 25 acres of land as partial ¦
¦ ¦consideration for the Peak Agreement. Boyne ¦
¦Southfork Agreement ¦entered into the Southfork Agreement with ¦
¦ ¦McDougals; McDougals transferred their rights¦
¦ ¦to SPD; SPD transferred its rights to SPH. ¦
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¶ 10 The United States Forest Service (U.S.) decided to consolidate lands in the Gallatin National Forest pursuant to the Gallatin Land Consolidation Act of 1998, Pub.L. No. 105–267, 112 Stat. 2371. Consolidation would make these lands easier for the U.S. to manage. Blixseth Group and two other entities, LeeLynn, Inc., and Wiley Mt., Inc., (collectively BLS), owned checker-boarded lands in the Gallatin National Forest that the U.S. wished to acquire. The U.S. entered into an agreement with BLS to exchange BLS lands for certain federal lands, including 15 acres of federal land at the top of Lone Peak.
¶ 11 BLS contracted to sell this Lone Peak property to Boyne through the Peak Agreement. Boyne owns and operates Big Sky Resort. Boyne intended to use the Lone Peak property as part of its ski resort. Boyne and BLS finalized the Peak Agreement on September 30, 1998. The Peak Agreement provided that BLS would transfer the property to Boyne if BLS were successful in obtaining the Lone Peak property from the U.S.
¶ 12 The Peak Agreement required Boyne to perform four obligations as consideration for its receipt of the Lone Peak property. First, Boyne would not challenge the U.S.'s decision to transfer the property to BLS. Second, Boyne would pay for a survey of the Lone Peak property. Third, Boyne would exchange 25 acres of Boyne's property with the McDougal brothers for the first half of the Lone Peak property, pursuant to a separate agreement, the Southfork Agreement. The Peak Agreement referred to the McDougal brothers because two brothers, Mel and Norm McDougal, owned LeeLynn, Inc. and Wiley Mt., Inc., two of the three entities that comprised BLS. Fourth, Boyne would pay cash to the Blixseth Group for the second half of the Lone Peak property. The parties estimated the Lone Peak property's value at $800 per acre. Boyne agreed to pay the appraised price of the property when the U.S. and BLS exchanged lands.
¶ 13 McDougals owned nine hundred acres of property, Southfork, situated south of Boyne's property. McDougals planned to develop Southfork into Spanish Peaks Resort. McDougals wanted ski in/ski out access to Big Sky Resort's chairlifts. Ski in/ski out access would increase the value of McDougals' planned Spanish Peaks Resort. Boyne owned the property between the planned Spanish Peaks Resort and the nearest chairlift at Big Sky Resort.
¶ 14 McDougals and Boyne finalized the Southfork Agreement in September 1998. The Southfork Agreement required Boyne to transfer 25 acres of Boyne's property to McDougals. The parties did not identify the exact location of the property to be transferred because McDougals had not yet designed Spanish Peaks Resort. The parties understood, however, that Boyne would transfer property that would provide McDougals ski in/ski out access for Spanish Peaks Resort to Big Sky Resort. McDougals agreed to pay an override fee to Boyne for each property that McDougals sold at Spanish Peaks Resort that would have ski in/ski out access to Big Sky Resort's chairlifts.
¶ 15 James Dolan (Dolan) and Tim Blixseth (Blixseth) co-managed SPD. SPD purchased the property that the McDougal brothers had been planning to develop as the Spanish Peaks Resort. The McDougal brothers then assigned their rights under both the Peak Agreement and the Southfork Agreement to SPD on September 5, 2000. The Southfork Agreement required Boyne to transfer the 25 acres that would facilitate ski in/ski out access for Spanish Peaks Resort. The third party to the Peak Agreement, Blixseth Group, managed by Blixseth, also assigned its rights under the Peak Agreement to SPD. These assignments left SPD as the sole beneficiary of both the Peak Agreement and the Southfork Agreement.
¶ 16 Dolan and Blixseth formed Spanish Peaks Holding (SPH) in 2002. The same two also managed SPH. SPH purchased the McDougals' Spanish Peaks Resort property from SPD. SPD then assigned its interest in the Southfork Agreement to SPH. SPD maintained its interest in the Peak Agreement.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pub. Lands Access Ass'n, Inc. v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs of Madison Cnty.
...We review for clear error a district court's findings of fact. Boyne USA, Inc. v. Spanish Peaks Dev., LLC, 2013 MT 1, ¶ 28, 368 Mont. 143, 292 P.3d 432. Clear error exists if substantial credible evidence fails to support the findings of fact, if the district court misapprehended the eviden......
-
Pub. Lands Access Ass'n, Inc. v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs of Madison Cnty.
...¶ 14 We review for clear error a district court's findings of fact. Boyne USA, Inc. v. Spanish Peaks Dev., LLC, 2013 MT 1, ¶ 28, 368 Mont. 143, 292 P.3d 432. Clear error exists if substantial credible evidence fails to support the findings of fact, if the district court misapprehended the e......
-
Deceased v. Smith-Cote (In re Cote)
...or uncertificated securities to a person entitled to them.3 See Boyne USA, Inc. v. Spanish Peaks Dev., LLC , 2013 MT 1, ¶ 64, 368 Mont. 143, 292 P.3d 432 ("Specific performance constitutes an equitable remedy....").4 See Britton v. Brown , 2013 MT 30, ¶ 27, 368 Mont. 379, 300 P.3d 667 ("The......
-
Burcalow Family, LLC v. Corral Bar, Inc.
...¶ 15 We review for clear error a district court's findings of fact. Boyne USA, Inc. v. Spanish Peaks Dev., LLC, 2013 MT 1, ¶ 28, 368 Mont. 143, 292 P.3d 432. We review for correctness a district court's legal determination. N. Cheyenne Tribe v. Roman Catholic Church, 2013 MT 24, ¶ 21, 368 M......