Knudsen v. TRANPSORT LEASING/CONTRACT, INC., No. A03-282.
| Decision Date | 09 December 2003 |
| Docket Number | No. A03-282. |
| Citation | 672 N.W.2d 221 |
| Parties | Gary A. KNUDSEN, Appellant, v. TRANSPORT LEASING/CONTRACT, INC., Respondent. |
| Court | Minnesota Court of Appeals |
Jon C. Saunders, Anderson, Larson, Hanson & Saunders, P.L.L.P., Willmar, MN, for appellant.
Peter G. Hill, Bale, Anderson, Polstein, Randall & Hill, Ltd., Minneapolis, MN, for respondent. Considered and decided by WILLIS, Presiding Judge; TOUSSAINT, Chief Judge; and SHUMAKER, Judge.
Appellant leased truck drivers from respondent and deducted as business expenses on his personal income tax returns 100% of the per diem payments made to the drivers. Because the Internal Revenue Code allows only a 50% deduction for per diem payments, appellant incurred additional income tax liabilities. Appellant then claimed that respondent had agreed to indemnify him against tax losses relating to respondent's employees. Ruling that the parties' unambiguous agreement provided for indemnification that did not include the tax liabilities assessed against appellant, the district court granted respondent's summary judgment motion. Appellant contends that the district court erroneously read and applied the indemnification agreement. Because a plain reading of the agreement does not require respondent to indemnify appellant against the tax losses incurred by appellant, we affirm.
Appellant Gary Knudsen, an owner of over-the-road trucks, entered into an "Exclusive Lease Agreement" with respondent Transport Leasing/Contract, Inc. (TLC) under which TLC agreed "to lease its employees to [Knudsen] for truck and semi-tractor driving services...."
TLC paid drivers' wages; collected, deposited, and reported state and federal employment taxes; provided workers' compensation and unemployment insurance; and offered various other employee-related benefits.
Drivers who traveled away from home were allowed a "per diem" for meals, lodging, and incidental expenses. Knudsen advanced per diem expenses to TLC employees and reimbursed TLC for per diem expenses it paid. TLC annually reported to Knudsen the per diem amounts TLC paid to its drivers.
Knudsen deducted as a business expense on his income tax returns 100% of the fees he paid TLC. The Internal Revenue Service audited both TLC and Knudsen for 1995 and 1996; found that Knudsen deducted 100% of the per diem payments to the drivers but was permitted under the Internal Revenue Code, Section 274, to deduct only 50% of those payments; and assessed tax deficiencies against Knudsen. As a result of the audit, Knudsen's taxable income for 1995 and 1996 increased and Knudsen incurred additional state and federal tax liabilities, as well as accountant's fees.
Relying on Section Twelve of the lease agreement, Knudsen contended that TLC was obligated to indemnify him for his additional tax obligations. That section provides for lessor indemnification of certain financial obligations:
Lessor shall indemnify Lessee against all liability and loss in connection with and shall assume full responsibility for payment of all federal, state and local employee taxes or contributions imposed or required under Lessor's employment insurance, social security and income tax laws with respect to Lessor's employees engaged in the performance of the Agreement.
TLC argued that Section Twelve does not require it to indemnify Knudsen against personal income tax liabilities. Knudsen sued; both parties moved for summary judgment; and, ruling that Section Twelve does not cover the tax liabilities Knudsen incurred, the district court granted TLC's motion. Knudsen appeals from the summary judgment.
The parties' agreement required the lessor of truck drivers to indemnify the lessee against losses relating to employer legal obligations for employee tax withholding, social security, and unemployment compensation.
Does the agreement require indemnification of additional tax liabilities lessee incurred when he deducted drivers' per diem payments as a business expense on his personal tax return at twice the amount allowed by tax laws?
On appeal from summary judgment, this court asks (1) whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and (2) whether the lower courts erred in their application of the law. State by Cooper v. French, 460 N.W.2d 2, 4 (Minn.1990)
. Summary judgment is inappropriate when reasonable persons might draw different conclusions from the evidence presented. DLH Inc. v. Russ, 566 N.W.2d 60, 69 (Minn.1997). Because the facts are undisputed, this case only raises issues of contract interpretation, which are questions of law subject to de novo review. Garrick v. Northland Ins. Co., 469 N.W.2d 709, 711 (Minn.1991).
The parties agree, and the district court held, that Section Twelve of the "Exclusive Lease Agreement" is unambiguous and that, under Section 17, Indiana law controls. Knudsen argues that the court misread and misapplied Section Twelve and thus erred as a matter of law.
Generally,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Inver Grove Heights Market Place, LLC v. ANC Foods III, Inc., A07-1197 (Minn. App. 7/1/2008)
...four corners of the instrument, and clear, plain, and unambiguous terms are conclusive of that intent." Knudsen v. Transp. Leasing/Contract, Inc., 672 N.W.2d 221, 223 (Minn. App. 2003), review denied (Minn. Feb. 25, 2004). However, "[s]o far as reasonably possible[,] a construction is to be......
-
Marvin Lumber & Cedar Co. v. Marvin Architectural Ltd.
...of the contract itself." Bores v. Domino's Pizza, LLC , 530 F.3d 671, 674 (8th Cir. 2008) ; see also Knudsen v. Transp. Leasing/Contract, Inc. , 672 N.W.2d 221, 223 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003) ("[W]hen a contract is unambiguous, a court gives effect to the parties' intentions as expressed in the ......
-
Wilson v. Career Educ. Corp.
...or that it does not expressly address a certain point, does not automatically render it ambiguous. Knudsen v. Transport Leasing/Contract, Inc., 672 N.W.2d 221, 223 (Minn. App. 2003); Fleet Bus. Credit, LLC v. Enterasys Networks, Inc., 816 N.E.2d 619, 629 (Ill. App. 1st Dist. 2004). Wilson a......
-
Bp Products North America v. Twin Cities Stores
...parties' intent. State ex rel. Humphrey v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 713 N.W.2d 350, 355 (Minn.2006); Knudsen v. Transport Leasing/Contract, Inc., 672 N.W.2d 221, 223 (Minn.Ct.App.2003). Only if the contract is ambiguous will the court go beyond the four corners of the document and examine e......