Capitol Federal Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Hohman

Citation235 Kan. 815,682 P.2d 1309
Decision Date13 July 1984
Docket NumberNo. 55420,55420
PartiesCAPITOL FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION, a corporation, Plaintiff, v. Loren H. HOHMAN, Betty Lou Hohman, et al., Defendants. and Donald GABLER and Leah F. Gabler, Cross-Petitioners/Appellees, v. Loren H. HOHMAN and Betty Lou Hohman, Appellants.
CourtKansas Supreme Court

Syllabus by the Court

Punitive damages may be awarded to the victim of a willful breach of trust even though the injury suffered is fully remedied by an equitable decree so that no monetary award of actual damages is made.

Thomas W. Regan, Topeka, argued the cause and was on the brief for the appellants Loren H. Hohman, Sr. and Betty Lou Hohman.

Ralph E. Skoog of Ralph E. Skoog, P.A., Topeka, argued the cause and was on the brief for the appellees Donald Gabler and Leah F. Gabler.

SCHROEDER, Chief Justice:

This case comes before the court for review of the decision of the Court of Appeals found at 9 Kan.App.2d 217, 675 P.2d 384 (1984). Loren H. and Betty Lou Hohman (defendants/appellants) appealed the trial court's award of punitive damages in favor of Donald and Leah F. Gabler (cross-petitioners/ appellees) where no actual damages were awarded in a mortgage foreclosure action. The Court of Appeals held punitive damages may be awarded to the victim of a willful breach of trust where the injury suffered is fully remedied by an equitable decree thereby precluding an award of actual damages. We granted review.

The nature of the case and the pertinent facts were summarized by the Court of Appeals as follows:

"This case started as a mortgage foreclosure action brought by Capitol Federal Savings and Loan Association. At trial the right to foreclose was not in dispute. The controversy centered on the dealings between the mortgagor, Loren Hohman, a Topeka attorney and real estate broker and developer, and Donald Gabler, a business associate and client of Hohman's and the occupant of the property. The facts as found by the trial court are not disputed on appeal and need only be summarized.

"Loren Hohman sold a residential lot to Mr. and Mrs. Gabler in 1976. Because the Gablers were involved in a federal income tax controversy, Hohman, as their attorney, advised them that he should retain title to the property and would deliver a deed to the Gablers at an appropriate time. The Gablers took Hohman's advice, and Hohman retained record title to the property.

"In 1977 the Gablers moved into the house they built on the lot. Over the ensuing years, the Gablers made payments on Capitol Federal's first mortgage, executed by the Hohmans, and also made substantial improvements to the house. In February, 1982, the Hohmans gave a $35,000 second mortgage on the property to Hill and Company to secure a preexisting debt.

"By December, 1981, the Gablers had fallen behind in their payments to Capitol Federal and in March, 1982, Capitol Federal filed this foreclosure action. Among the defendants were Hohman and his wife as record title holders; the Gablers as occupants; and Hill and Company as holders of the second mortgage. The Gablers cross-claimed against the Hohmans, alleging breach of fiduciary duty and praying for actual damages to the extent of any interest of third parties above the mortgage to Capitol Federal and for punitive damages.

"In addition to decreeing foreclosure, the trial court found that a constructive trust existed, with Hohman in a fiduciary relationship to the Gablers by reason of Hohman's agreement to transfer the deed, and that Hohman had an attorney-client relationship with the Gablers. It found that equitable title to the property, and hence the equity of redemption, belonged to the Gablers. It also found that the second mortgage to Hill and Company was given in breach of trust and without consideration and therefore decreed it void. On appeal no issue is raised as to any of these aspects of the judgment.

"However, the trial court also found that Hohman's breach of his fiduciary...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Groshek v. Trewin
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Supreme Court
    • June 24, 2010
    ...that “the granting of affirmative equitable relief will support an award of punitive damages”); Capitol Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Hohman, 235 Kan. 815, 682 P.2d 1309, 1310-11 (1984) (allowing punitive damages incidental to equitable relief of Z.D. Howard Co. v. Cartwright, 537 P.2d 345, 348......
  • Nabours v. Longview Sav. & Loan Ass'n
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • July 17, 1985
    ...deterrent function of exemplary damages that allowed recovery, not the recovery of actual damages. Capitol Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Hohman, 235 Kan. 815, 682 P.2d 1309, 1311 (1984). Several courts have directly embraced Dean McCormick's analysis by holding that once the plaintiff has......
  • Wells Fargo Vendor Fin. Servs., LLC v. Nationwide Learning, LLC
    • United States
    • Kansas Court of Appeals
    • August 17, 2018
    ...without deciding, that punitive damages may be imposed in a successor liability case in Kansas. See Capitol Fed'l Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Hohman , 235 Kan. 815, 816-17, 682 P.2d 1309 (1984) (finding equitable relief was the substantial equivalent of actual damages); Golconda Screw, Inc. v. ......
  • Golconda Screw, Inc. v. West Bottoms Ltd.
    • United States
    • Kansas Court of Appeals
    • April 28, 1995
    ...be awarded incidental to equitable relief. Capitol Fed'l Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Hohman, 9 Kan.App.2d 217, 675 P.2d 384, aff'd 235 Kan. 815, 682 P.2d 1309 (1984). Golconda cites numerous cases from other jurisdictions that hold punitive damages are available where there has been a fraudulen......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • The Kansas Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act
    • United States
    • Kansas Bar Association KBA Bar Journal No. 68-06, June 1999
    • Invalid date
    ...866 P.2d 985 (1993). [FN93]. Id., at 1006, citing Capitol Fed'l Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Hohman, 9 Kan.App.2d 217, 675 P.2d 384, affirmed, 235 Kan. 815, 682 P.2d 1309 (1984). [FN94]. Golconda Screw, fn. 90 supra. [FN95]. Id., at 1007, citing K.S.A. 60-3703 (1994). In diversity cases, this pr......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT