Jahn v. Burns
Decision Date | 23 April 1979 |
Docket Number | No. 5028,5028 |
Citation | 593 P.2d 828 |
Parties | 26 UCC Rep.Serv. 257 Janet A. JAHN, Appellant (Plaintiff below), v. Michael BURNS, Appellee (Defendant below). |
Court | Wyoming Supreme Court |
William J. Flynn, of Law Offices of Richard D. Gist, Lander, for appellant.
Donald H. Hall of Vidakovich, Pappas & Hooper, P. C., Lander, for appellee.
Before RAPER, C. J., and McCLINTOCK, THOMAS, ROSE and ROONEY, JJ.
Appellant-plaintiff and appellee-defendant were involved in an automobile accident. Defendant mailed plaintiff a letter accompanied by a cashier's check for $200.00. The letter read in part: "I intend this check as payment in full for all personal and property damages resulting from our accident of Feb. 10, 1978." The front of the check contained the notation: "Payment in full for all personal and property damages resulting from our accident of Feb. 10, 1978." Plaintiff crossed out this notation and wrote on the back of the check: "Deposited under protest and with full reservation of all my rights." She then endorsed the check and cashed it. Thereafter, she filed a complaint against defendant for damages arising out of the accident. Defendant answered the complaint asserting, among others, a defense of accord and satisfaction. Defendant then filed a motion for summary judgment. The parties stipulated that the motion did not raise a genuine issue as to any material fact.
The district court granted the motion for summary judgment, holding as a matter of law that plaintiff's acceptance of the check amounted to an accord and satisfaction. We will affirm.
Where a claim is unliquidated and in dispute, a party's acceptance of a check in an amount less than that claimed and expressed to be in full payment constitutes an accord and satisfaction notwithstanding any restriction, reservation or protest placed upon the check by the payee. Thayer v. Smith, Wyo., 357 P.2d 1115 (1960); and Oedekoven v. Oedekoven, Wyo., 538 P.2d 1292 (1975). This is the law in most jurisdictions. See 1 Am.Jur.2d Accord and Satisfaction § 21, p. 320; 1 C.J.S. Accord and Satisfaction § 32, p. 512; Annotations 34 A.L.R. 1035, 75 A.L.R. 905; and Restatement of the Law, Contracts, § 76, p. 83 (A.L.I.1932).
Plaintiff recognizes this proposition but contends it was changed in 1961 by enactment of §§ 34-21-101 through 34-21-966, W.S. 1977 (the Uniform Commercial Code). This is the only issue in this case. Plaintiff presents two arguments: (I.) § 34-21-126, W.S.1977, is general enough to control this matter, and (II.) §§ 34-21-301 through 34-21-379, W.S.1977 (Article 3 of the U.C.C.) concerning commercial paper, brings this matter within the purview of the Code inasmuch as a check was used.
Section 34-21-126 reads:
The section is not applicable to the facts of this case by virtue of its express terms. The portion pertinent to this case reads: "(a) party who with explicit reservation of rights * * * assents to performance In a manner * * * offered by the other party does not thereby prejudice the rights reserved." (Emphasis supplied.) The manner offered here is part payment Conditioned on it being in full settlement. In an attempt to reserve rights, plaintiff did not "assents to performance In the manner offered."
The words of the statute are plain. Construction or interpretation liberal or strict is unnecessary. In construing a statute, its words must be given their plain and ordinary meaning. Mountain Fuel Supply Co. v. Emerson, Wyo., 578 P.2d 1351 (1978); Geraud v. Schrader, Wyo., 531 P.2d 872, cert. den. sub nom. Wind River Indian Education Association, Inc. v. Ward, 423 U.S. 904, 96 S.Ct. 205, 46 L.Ed.2d 134 (1975); Johnson v. Safeway Stores, Inc., Wyo., 568 P.2d 908 (1977). And it was on this basis that the trial court made its determination, stating it well in the summary judgment:
" * * * This is not a situation in which plaintiff assented to a performance in any manner demanded or offered by the defendant, * * *."
The statutory provision was not intended to apply to a situation as exists in this case. Official Comment to this section of the Uniform Commercial Code reads:
"The section is not addressed to the creation or loss of remedies in the ordinary course of performance but rather to a method of procedure where one party is claiming as of right something which the other feels to be unwarranted." 1 U.L.A.-U.C.C. § 1-207, pp. 97, 98 (1976). (Emphasis supplied.)
With reference to this Official Comment, it has been said that:
William D. Hawkland, 1 "The Effect of U.C.C. § 1-207 on the Doctrine of Accord and Satisfaction by Conditional Check," 74 Comm.L.J. 329, 331 (1969).
The five cases cited by plaintiff 2 in support of her contention do not address themselves to the foregoing. In only one of them was the reservation of rights section of the Uniform Commercial Code (§ 34-21-126 in Wyoming) determinative, and in that case the court noted the establishment by statute in South Dakota of a minority position with reference to accord and satisfaction before the adoption of the Uniform Commercial Code. 3
Appellant also contends that since a check was used and since §§ 34-21-301 through 34-21-379 relates to commercial paper, this matter is thereby brought within the purview of the provisions of the U.C.C. Plainly stated, the fact that a negotiable instrument was used in a transaction does not make the entire transaction a commercial one. It is true that whenever a negotiable instrument is used, the provisions of §§ 34-21-301 through 34-21-379 are involved. But these provisions pertain to the interpretation, transferability, negotiability, rights...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Allied-Signal, Inc. v. Wyoming State Bd. of Equalization
...resort to rules of construction that rely on extrinsic events. See Longfellow v. State, 803 P.2d 1383 (Wyo.1991); Tenneco; Jahn v. Burns, 593 P.2d 828 (Wyo.1979); Zanetti Riverton Bus Lines, Inc. v. State Board of Equalization, 485 P.2d 387 (Wyo.1971). Even though the legislature did not ac......
-
Sheridan Newspapers, Inc. v. City of Sheridan
...16-4-203, W.S.1977, 1982 Replacement). In construing a statute, its words must be given their plain and ordinary meanings, Jahn v. Burns, Wyo., 593 P.2d 828 (1979); Schwager v. State, Wyo., 589 P.2d 1303 (1979); Belco Petroleum Corporation v. State Board of Equalization, Wyo., 587 P.2d 204 ......
-
Horn Waterproofing Corp. v. Bushwick Iron & Steel Co., Inc.
...Lbr. Co. v. Kincaid Carolina Corp., supra ); State Dept. of Fisheries v. J-Z Sales Corp., 25 Wash.App. 671, 610 P.2d 390; Jahn v. Burns, 593 P.2d 828 (Wyo.).4 Rosenthal, supra, n. 1, at 49.5 See, id., at 49, 64; Hawkland, supra, n. 1, at 329, 332. Despite the view shared by Rosenthal and Ha......
-
Robinson v. Garcia, 13-89-140-CV
...written lease); Marton Remodeling v. Jensen, 706 P.2d 607 (Utah 1985) (underlying contract for house remodeling). But see Jahn v. Burns, 593 P.2d 828, 831 (Wyo.1979). One distinguished commentator it seems fairly clear that if such a check is tendered in settlement, the transaction must be ......
-
Ucc Section 1-207 on Full Payment Checks: Lawyers Beware
...School seems to approve, as well. 3. Id. 4. Michigan, Fritz v. Marantette, 404 Mich. 329, 273 N.W.2d 425 (1978); Wyoming, Jahn v. Burns, 593 P.2d 828 (Supreme Court, 1979); North Carolina, Brown v. Coastal Truckways, Inc., 44 N.C.App. 454, 261 S.E.2d 266 (1980); Georgia, American Food Purve......