Gronquist v. Olson

• Decision Date: 23 April 1954
• Docket Number: No. 36229,36229
• Parties: GRONQUIST v. OLSON et al.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

Page 159

64 N.W.2d 159

242 Minn. 119

GRONQUIST v. OLSON et al.

No. 36229.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

April 23, 1954.

Syllabus by the Court.

Where one joint tort-feasor is released from further liability, regardless of what form that release may take, as long as it does not constitute an accord and satisfaction or an unqualified or absolute release and there is no manifestation of any intention to the contrary in the instrument, the injured party should not be denied his right to pursue the remaining wrongdoers until he has received full satisfaction of his judgment.

C. E. Maxwell, Minneapolis, for appellant.

Donald M. Fraser, Louise A. Herou and Larson, Loevinger, Lindquist, Freeman & Fraser, Minneapolis, for respondent.

NELSON, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order denying a motion by one of two joint tort-feasors to vacate and discharge a judgment against him on the ground that a release and dismissal of the action as to one of the tortfeasors after verdict but before entry of judgment operates as a release of him as well.

An action was commenced against Vern H. Olson, and Doris M. Olson, his wife, on March 29, 1950, to recover $4,000 and interest on a promissory note. On December 8, 1950, the complaint in the action was amended to allege conspiracy to defraud on the part of the defendants. In the amended complaint the plaintiff, in addition to the alleged claim of $4,000 and interest due on the note, made the following allegation in paragraph VIII:

'Due to the willful, malicious and fraudulent acts of the defendants herein, plaintiff prays punitive damages in the sum of Five Thousand ($5,000.00) Dollars.'

Plaintiff further alleged that in furtherance of the conspiracy defendants purchased property described as the north one-half of lot 8, block 8, George Appleby's Addition, county of Hennepin, state of Minnesota, with the money fraudulently obtained under the note and placed the property in the name of Doris M. Olson, the wife. In the prayer for relief, plaintiff prayed judgment for the sum of $9,000 and interest on principal of the note declaring such judgment to be a specific lien on said property and authorizing sale thereof by the plaintiff in order to satisfy such lien.

The jury found for the plaintiff against both defendants in the amount of $8,000, and the court later denied motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial. The order therein was entered in the district court of Hennepin county as to Doris M. Olson on December 31, 1951, and as to Vern H. Olson on March 4, 1953. Subsequent to the order denying the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial as to defendant Doris M. Olson, the following stipulation was entered into between the plaintiff and Doris M. Olson on February 18, 1952:

'It is hereby stipulated by and between the plaintiff and his counsel and defendant Doris M. Olson individually and also doing business as Olson Investment Company, one of the defendants above named, and her counsel, that:

'In consideration for the transfer of the equity of redemption and any other interest of the defendant Doris M. Olson in property known as 5749 41 Ave. So., Minneapolis, Minnesota, also known as the North one-half (1/2) of Lot Eight (8) Block Eight (8), Geo. Appleby's Addition, said interest having been transferred by quit claim deed of even date herewith, the plaintiff agrees that he will take no further proceedings against said defendant Doris M. Olson and more specifically, that he will not enter judgment against said defendant or in any other manner proceed against her for any claim arising out of the above entitled action. It is understood by and between the parties that the interest in said property does not constitute a full satisfaction of the amount rendered in a verdict for the plaintiff and against both of the defendants above named and that this partial payment of said verdict is given solely for the purpose of inducing the plaintiff herein to refrain from any further proceedings against the defendant Doris M. Olson in this action.'

A dismissal as to Doris Olson was thereafter filed on March 17, 1953, in the following form:

'(Title of Cause.)

'DISMISSAL AS TO DORIS MAE OLSON.

'Comes now plaintiff and dismisses the above-entitled action as to defendant D. M. Olson, also known as Doris Mae Olson, but specifically does not dismiss as to the remaining defendant herein.'

Thereafter plaintiff entered judgment against Vern H. Olson and the Olson Investment Company March 17, 1953, for $8,982.67 which was docketed as of that date. No appeal has been taken from the judgment.

It appears that Doris M. Olson when named in the complaint as one of the defendants was referred to as Doris M. Olson, doing business as Olson Investment Company; that the Olson Investment Company was included by mistake when judgment was entered; and that thereafter a dismissal of the Olson Investment Company was filed on May 8, 1953, dismissing it from the judgment pursuant to stipulation and by order of the court, leaving Vern H. Olson the sole remaining judgment debtor.

Plaintiff thereafter noticed a motion for hearing on the 11th day of September, 1953, in which he moved the court for an order as follows:

'1. Directing the entry by the Clerk of District Court of a partial satisfaction of the judgment in the above entitled action entered on March 17, 1953, as follows:

'Partially satisfying said judgment in the sum of $4,770.00 as of March 17, 1953, or in the alternative adjudging said sum of $4,770.00 as the correct amount by which said judgment should be satisfied as of March 17, 1953, and authorizing and directing the attorney for the plaintiff to execute a certificate of partial satisfaction in accordance therewith.

'Said Motion will be based upon the attached Affidavit and pursuant to Section 548.15(4) of the Minnesota Statutes and upon all the files and proceedings herein.'

Vern H. Olson then filed a notice of motion to be heard September 11, 1953, for an order from the court as follows:

'1. Vacating and discharging the judgment entered in the above entitled matter.

'Said motion is made on the ground that the dismissal of the action against defendant Doris Olson and her release from any liability in said action, and the payment received by plaintiff from said Doris Olson, released this defendant from liability.'

This was followed by the filing of notice of cross-motion by plaintiff to be heard by the court below on the same date, September 11, 1953, for an order as follows:

'1. Ordering a dismissal of the above entitled action as to defendant Doris M. Olson, also doing business as Olson Investment Company, upon the condition that plaintiff make a partial satisfaction of judgment against the remaining defendant in the amount to be determined by the Court pursuant to a separate motion heretofore served upon the defendant, Vern H. Olson, and noticed for hearing upon the same date.

'Said motion is made pursuant to Rule 41.01(a) (2) and Rule 61 of the Rules of Civil Procedure and upon the further grounds that, as shown in the files and proceedings herein, the plaintiff has agreed not to proceed against the defendant Doris M. Olson and that a dismissal as to said defendant will not be prejudicial to the remaining defendant inasmuch as there is no right to contribution between the parties as a matter of law.

'Notice of the within motion is given only to the defendant, Vern H. Olson, by reason of a stipulation already on file herein wherein the defendant Doris M. Olson has agreed and consented to a dismissal.'

Plaintiff on the date of this hearing presented a supporting affidavit as to the value of the north one-half of lot 8, block 8, George Appleby's Addition, Hennepin county, Minnesota, whereby it was set forth that the property in question had been appraised at plaintiff's request by the Veterans' Administration, which appraisal fixed the market value of an equity of redemption in this property which Doris M. Olson as owner had conveyed by quit-claim deed to the plaintiff pursuant to the conditions of the stipulation and the dismissal of the action as to her. The appraisal fixed the current market value of the equity of redemption at $4,432.82. Plaintiff proposed in the supporting affidavit that the total credit to be applied toward partial satisfaction of the existing judgment against appellant be increased to $4,770 by allowing certain specified interest credits. Plaintiff at the time these motions were heard also moved that, if the appraisal was not acceptable to the appellant for purposes of a partial satisfaction, the court appoint appraisers to reappraise the property for the purpose of arriving at a fair and proper reduction by way of partial satisfaction of the judgment.

Upon consideration of the three motions, the court made the following order of September 23, 1953:

'It is ordered that the motion for the appointment of appraisers be granted unless within six days after the date of this order the parties, through their respective attorneys, agree between themselves as to the reasonable value of the property received from defendant Doris Olson. This appointment, if necessary, will be made ex parte upon presentation to the Court of an affidavit by either party showing the inability of counsel to come to an agreement within the time here specified.

'It is further ordered that the motion for an order vacating and discharging the judgment herein be denied.

'It is further ordered that the motion by the plaintiff for an order dismissing the above action as to defendant Doris M. Olson be denied at this time without prejudice to the right of plaintiff to renew his motion at any subsequent time.'

It is from this order that the appeal has been taken by Vern H. Olson.

The legal issues presented are:

(1) Was the dismissal of the action as to one of the joint tort-feasors, after verdict and after denial of a motion for a new trial, a dismissal on the...