Hamel v. American Continental Corp., No. 85-150
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming |
| Writing for the Court | Before THOMAS, C.J., BROWN, CARDINE and MACY, JJ., and RAPER; RAPER |
| Citation | 713 P.2d 1152 |
| Docket Number | No. 85-150 |
| Decision Date | 05 February 1986 |
| Parties | Michael HAMEL, Daniel L. Cashman, Robert W. Zumbo, Bruce Schoeneberg, Charles Moran, Leon W. Shayler, Charles Frakes, Karl W. Sherman, Brett Deschenes, Roy T. Webb, David Thompson, Rick Gonzales, Robert de Castro, Alfred J. Tennant, Larry Timothy Largent, James G. Largent, Randy H. Schoeneberg, Kevin C. Keller, Larry T. Vanover, Richard L. Jolley, Leonard G. Holland, Russell G. Fields, Jeffrey J. Payne, Victor L. Fagerstone, Appellants (Plaintiffs), Jim Clark, Rickie O. Phillips, and Kelly Webster, (Plaintiffs), v. AMERICAN CONTINENTAL CORPORATION, an Ohio corporation, and Medema Homes of Utah, Inc., a Utah corporation, Appellees (Defendants), Patrick Earl Glaspie, d/b/a Western Comfort Builders, (Defendant). |
Page 1152
Jim Clark, Rickie O. Phillips, and Kelly Webster, (Plaintiffs),
v.
AMERICAN CONTINENTAL CORPORATION, an Ohio corporation, and Medema Homes of Utah, Inc., a Utah corporation, Appellees (Defendants),
Patrick Earl Glaspie, d/b/a Western Comfort Builders, (Defendant).
Bernard E. Cole and Douglas J. Moench, Jr. of Cole & Moench, Cheyenne, for appellants.
Edwin H. Whitehead of Urbigkit, Whitehead, Zunker & Davidson, P.C., Cheyenne, for appellee American Continental Corp.
Before THOMAS, C.J., BROWN, CARDINE and MACY, JJ., and RAPER, J., Retired.
RAPER, Justice, Retired.
The district court, on motion, dismissed a mechanic's lien foreclosure action brought by the 24 appellants, employees of Patrick
Page 1153
Earl Glaspie, d/b/a Western Comfort Builders (Glaspie), discharged in bankruptcy. Glaspie had contracted to do work for American Continental Corporation (American), d/b/a/ Medema Homes, appellee owner, on the land of American.Appellants set out the issues to be:
"1. IS THE CONTRACTOR A PARTY WHO MUST BE JOINED AS A PARTY TO A MECHANIC[']S LIEN FORECLOSURE ACTION, AS AN INDESPENSIBLE [sic] PARTY AND WHO, THEREFORE, CAUSES A STAY OF PROCEEDINGS UPON THE FILING OF A PETITION IN BANKRUPTCY?
"2. DOES A PETITION IN BANKRUPTCY FILED BY A DEBTOR WHO IS AN INDESPENSIBLE [sic] PARTY TO A MECHANIC[']S LIEN FORECLOSURE ACTION ACT TO STAY THE FORECLOSURE ACTION, THUS TOLLING THE ACTION'S STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS?"
American clarifies and restates the issues to be:
"1. Is a contractor, who is bankrupt, and [sic] indispensable party to rendition of a valid judgment establishing and foreclosing a lien.
"2. Do the automatic stay provisions of 15 U.S.C. § 362(a) preclude creditor actions against other parties who have not filed proceedings in the bankruptcy court?
"3. Do the automatic stay provisions of § 362(a), as applicable to the debtor, stay the judicial proceedings against the owner and the liened property, and as such toll the statute of limitations as to commencing an action to enforce a lien within one hundred eighty (180) days?"
We will affirm.
Appellants were employed by Glaspie. Glaspie initiated federal "Chapter Seven" bankruptcy proceedings. Unpaid appellants were stayed by the bankruptcy court from initiating any proceedings against Glaspie to collect wages due from Glaspie. Glaspie was eventually discharged from bankruptcy on May 7, 1984. The district court mechanic's lien foreclosure action was filed on May 23, 1984, 183 days after the recording of statements of mechanic's lien with the Laramie County clerk on November 22, 1983. W.S. 29-2-109 mandates that:
"All actions to foreclose or enforce a lien...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cordova v. Gosar, No. 85-271
...of Casper, Wyo., 710 P.2d 827 (1985); Venson Ford v. Madia, Wyo., 480 P.2d 101 (1971); Hamel v. American Continental Corporation, Wyo., 713 P.2d 1152 (1986). Under present pleading strictures, the Gosar complaint is obviously sufficient. Stage Two: procedural sufficiency of the movant affid......
-
Miller v. State, No. 86-130
...did not toll or deter foreclosure proceedings against the purchaser and lender, Hamel v. American Continental Corporation, Wyo., 713 P.2d 1152 (1986), but no foreclosure actions were In the brief trial, only one lien claimant testified. The plumbing contractor stated that he had done work o......
-
Diamond Hill Inv. Co. v. Shelden, No. 88-43
...to actions against debtors and does not include actions against nonbankrupt co-defendants. Hamel v. American Continental Corporation, 713 P.2d 1152 (Wyo.1986); Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America v. Butler, 803 F.2d 61 (2d Cir.1986); Fortier v. Dona Anna Plaza Partners, 74......
-
KM Upstream, LLC v. Elkhorn Contr., Inc., Nos. S–11–0185
...1329–30 (10th Cir.1984); Diamond Hill Inv. Co. v. Shelden, 767 P.2d 1005, 1010 (Wyo.1989); [278 P.3d 718]Hamel v. Am. Continental Corp., 713 P.2d 1152, 1154 (Wyo.1986); 2 Howard J. Steinberg, Bankruptcy Litigation § 12:13 (2d ed. 2008); 9B Am.Jur.2d Bankruptcy § 1747 (2006). [¶ 15] It must ......
-
Cordova v. Gosar, No. 85-271
...of Casper, Wyo., 710 P.2d 827 (1985); Venson Ford v. Madia, Wyo., 480 P.2d 101 (1971); Hamel v. American Continental Corporation, Wyo., 713 P.2d 1152 (1986). Under present pleading strictures, the Gosar complaint is obviously sufficient. Stage Two: procedural sufficiency of the movant affid......
-
Miller v. State, No. 86-130
...did not toll or deter foreclosure proceedings against the purchaser and lender, Hamel v. American Continental Corporation, Wyo., 713 P.2d 1152 (1986), but no foreclosure actions were In the brief trial, only one lien claimant testified. The plumbing contractor stated that he had done work o......
-
Diamond Hill Inv. Co. v. Shelden, No. 88-43
...to actions against debtors and does not include actions against nonbankrupt co-defendants. Hamel v. American Continental Corporation, 713 P.2d 1152 (Wyo.1986); Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America v. Butler, 803 F.2d 61 (2d Cir.1986); Fortier v. Dona Anna Plaza Partners, 74......
-
KM Upstream, LLC v. Elkhorn Contr., Inc., Nos. S–11–0185
...1329–30 (10th Cir.1984); Diamond Hill Inv. Co. v. Shelden, 767 P.2d 1005, 1010 (Wyo.1989); [278 P.3d 718]Hamel v. Am. Continental Corp., 713 P.2d 1152, 1154 (Wyo.1986); 2 Howard J. Steinberg, Bankruptcy Litigation § 12:13 (2d ed. 2008); 9B Am.Jur.2d Bankruptcy § 1747 (2006). [¶ 15] It must ......