Nelson v. Nelson, 87-92

Citation740 P.2d 939
Decision Date12 August 1987
Docket NumberNo. 87-92,87-92
PartiesLura M. NELSON, Appellant (Plaintiff), v. Robert L. NELSON, Appellee (Defendant).
CourtWyoming Supreme Court

Harold F. Buck of Kline, Buck & Asay, Cheyenne, for appellant.

Richard Wolf, Cheyenne, for appellee.

Before BROWN, C.J., and THOMAS, CARDINE, URBIGKIT and MACY, JJ.

MACY, Justice.

The district court denied Lura M. Nelson's request that her former husband, Robert L. Nelson, be required to reimburse her for a tax assessment under the terms of their divorce decree.

We reverse.

During their marriage, the Nelsons took investment tax credits in 1980, 1982, and 1983 on three pieces of realty they owned at the time of their divorce in January of 1985. The property settlement approved by the court provided that:

"The husband agrees to indemnify and hold the wife harmless from any and all claims, debts, liabilities or charges of any sort known or unknown which may be brought against any or all of the above referenced real property, partnership interest, sole proprietorship interests or assets of any sort which have been set over to the wife * * *."

It also provided that the wife would be responsible for her own debts after September 28, 1984. The Internal Revenue Service issued a levy against the wife's bank account on March 27, 1986, for one-half of the parties' tax liability arising from the disallowance of the investment tax credits. The wife then moved the district court to require the husband to reimburse her for the tax assessment. The district court denied the motion, finding that the agreement was silent as to the tax liability and that, because the assessment was made after September 28, 1984, each party would be responsible for his own assessment.

If an agreement is in writing and the language is clear and unambiguous, the intention is to be secured from the words of the agreement. Wolff v. Belco Development Corporation, Wyo., 736 P.2d 730 (1987); Arnold v. Mountain West Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company, Inc., Wyo., 707 P.2d 161 (1985). Also, it is well recognized that, if the terms are clear, it falls within the province of the court to construe the instrument as a matter of law. Wangler v. Federer, Wyo., 714 P.2d 1209 (1986). It is only when the agreement is ambiguous that resort to extrinsic evidence is warranted. Hensley v. Williams, Wyo., 726 P.2d 90 (1986); State v. Moncrief, Wyo., 720 P.2d 470 (1986).

Because the property agreement is clear, there is no need to resort to previous draft agreements to ascertain the intent of the parties. The settlement agreement plainly provides that the husband will hold the wife harmless from "all * * * debts [and]...

To continue reading

Request your trial
23 cases
  • INTERN. SURPLUS LINES v. Univ. of Wyo. Res. Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Wyoming
    • April 25, 1994
    ...to determine the intent of the parties." Holst v. Guynn, 696 P.2d 632, 634 (Wyo.1985) (citations omitted); accord Nelson v. Nelson, 740 P.2d 939, 940 (Wyo.1987); accord Lund, 849 P.2d at 739; Klutznick v. Thulin, 814 P.2d 1267, 1270 (Wyo.1991); Kerper v. Kerper, 780 P.2d 923, 934 (Wyo.1989)......
  • Carlson v. Carlson
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • June 2, 1989
    ...of law for the court if the terms of the agreement are clear. Milligan v. Big Valley Corporation, 754 P.2d 1063 (Wyo.1988); Nelson v. Nelson, 740 P.2d 939 (Wyo.1987); Wyoming Recreation Commission v. Hagar, 711 P.2d 402 (Wyo.1985); Kelliher v. Herman, 701 P.2d 1157 (Wyo.1985); Hursh Agency,......
  • True Oil Co. v. Sinclair Oil Corp.
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • March 24, 1989
    ...is in writing and the language is clear and unambiguous, the intention is to be secured from the words of the agreement." Nelson v. Nelson, 740 P.2d 939, 940 (Wyo.1987). See also Kost v. First Nat. Bank of Greybull, 684 P.2d 819 (Wyo.1984). When the language is clear and unambiguous, the wr......
  • Jackson State Bank v. Homar
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • August 28, 1992
    ...is in writing and the language is clear and unambiguous, the intention is to be secured from the words of the agreement." Nelson v. Nelson, 740 P.2d 939, 940 (Wyo.1987). In N & D Fashions, Inc. v. DHJ Industries, Inc., 548 F.2d 722 (8th Cir.1976), the parties had agreed to a very similar ar......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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