Austin v. Bingham
319 P.3d 738
Utah Ct. App.2014Background
- Jon and Adree Bingham and Michael and Wanda Austin are neighbors; the Binghams have a private right-of-way across the Austins' property that had been used for decades.
- Beginning in January 2009 the Austins repeatedly closed, secured, and obstructed the gates on the right-of-way, at times using locks, tying gates, physically blocking access, and otherwise harassing users.
- The Austins also interfered with the Binghams’ maintenance of the right-of-way; the Binghams created an alternative access through a neighbor’s pasture after safety concerns.
- Litigation followed: the trial court credited the Binghams, dismissed the Austins’ claims, and awarded the Binghams $109,591 (including $20,000 punitive and full attorney fees for bad-faith claims/defenses).
- On appeal the Austins challenged four damage components totaling $30,600 (medical expenses $3,000; gate-opening inconvenience $7,000; alternative-access improvements $8,600; additional travel/time $12,000); the Binghams sought appellate attorney fees.
- The appellate court affirmed the damage awards and remanded for calculation of attorney fees for the Binghams’ work on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Binghams) | Defendant's Argument (Austins) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Were $3,000 of medical expenses supported by the record? | Mrs. Bingham sought ER care and medication caused by stress/fear from Austins’ harassment. | Austins say evidence ties treatment to childbirth or otherwise lacks foundation; hearsay and no receipts. | Affirmed: trial court credited Mrs. Bingham’s testimony; lack of documentary bills and some objections were unpreserved. |
| Were $7,000 gate-inconvenience damages sufficiently proven? | Mr. Bingham testified to opening three gates ~4x/day for ~1,200 days and quantified inconvenience (~$0.50/gate as court found). | Austins argued estimates/speculation, overcounting (weekends, vacations), and imprecision. | Affirmed: approximations permissible; court reasonably discounted plaintiff’s initial $1/gate to $0.50/gate. |
| Were $8,600 for making the alternative access usable supported? | Mr. Bingham testified he spent ~$8,000–$8,600 on culverts and fencing to create the alternative route. | Austins highlighted inconsistent testimony and lack of receipts. | Affirmed: minor numerical inconsistency not fatal; oral testimony credible and sufficient. |
| Were $12,000 for additional travel/time valid? | Court awarded mileage (8,104 miles at $0.50/mi) and 405 hours at $20/hr based on testimony about distance, frequency (10 trips/day), travel speed, and days in use. | Austins disputed mileage/time calculations, frequency, impassable days, and lack of foundation for $20/hr valuation. | Affirmed: factual conflicts unpreserved or left to trial court’s credibility determinations; evidence supports award. |
Key Cases Cited
- Chen v. Stewart, 100 P.3d 1177 (2004 UT 82) (appellate standard for challenging factual findings and requirement to view evidence favorably to trial court)
- Hale v. Big H Constr., Inc., 288 P.3d 1046 (2012 UT App 288) (standard on adequacy of evidentiary support for findings)
- Hi-Country Estates Homeowners Ass'n v. Bagley & Co., 182 P.3d 417 (2008 UT App 105) (appellate review of factual findings and preservation principles)
- Atkin Wright & Miles v. Mountain States Tel. & Tel. Co., 709 P.2d 330 (Utah 1985) (plaintiff must prove fact of damages and may rely on reasonable approximations)
- Cook Assocs., Inc. v. Warnick, 664 P.2d 1161 (Utah 1983) (proof of damage amount need not be precise; reasonable estimate suffices)
- Valcarce v. Fitzgerald, 961 P.2d 305 (Utah 1998) (prevailing party awarded appellate attorney fees when trial court awarded fees below)