336 P.3d 144
Wyo.2014Background
- In December 2009, a Kindel Concrete vehicle rear-ended Kim Bolding, driven by Ouimette.
- December 2011, Bolding sued Kindel Concrete and Ouimette for negligence and negligent entrustment; Ouimette answered; they later settled; Kindel defaulted.
- July 22, 2013, a default judgment hearing occurred; it was unreported; Bolding testified and offered five exhibits, including a physical-therapy deposition.
- The district court ruled Bolding failed to prove causation and damages; denied her motion to reconsider; stated it applied a preponderance standard.
- November 13, 2013, the court entered an Order Denying Judgment and dismissed Bolding’s lawsuit; she appealed.
- Bolding argued on appeal about the correct standard of proof and that the record was not properly settled under W.R.A.P. 3.03; the court disagreed and affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Damages standard applied at trial | Bolding contends the court used a reasonable certainty standard, not reasonable probability. | Kindel contends the court applied the correct reasonable probability standard. | Court affirmed; no reversible error in standard used. |
| W.R.A.P. 3.03 record settlement | Bolding asserts the record should have been settled under 3.03. | Kindel asserts the court properly refused to settle due to lack of recollection. | Court affirmed refusal to settle the record. |
| Damages proof for negligent entrustment | Bolding argues damages were proven by preponderance and supported by evidence. | Kindel argues Bolding failed to prove damages causally linked to negligent entrustment and failed to prove fault. | Court affirmed that Bolding failed to prove damages were caused by negligent entrustment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hashimoto v. Marathon Pipe Line Co., 767 P.2d 158 (Wyo. 1989) (clarifies difference between reasonable certainty and reasonable probability)
- Spitzer v. Spitzer, 777 P.2d 587 (Wyo. 1989) (limits on damages proof when unliquidated)
- Adel v. Parkhurst, 681 P.2d 886 (Wyo. 1984) (damages proof and allowances for unliquidated damages)
- Feaster v. Feaster, 721 P.2d 1095 (Wyo. 1986) (concludes that lack of memory can preclude settlement of record)
- Maynard v. Maynard, 585 P.2d 1201 (Wyo. 1978) (record settling not admissible when court cannot recall facts)
- Northwest Bldg. Co., LLC v. Northwest Distrib. Co., 285 P.3d 239 (Wyo. 2012) (3.03 purpose and district court discretion to settle statements)
- Jacobs v. Jacobs, 895 P.2d 441 (Wyo. 1995) (appellant bears burden to provide a complete record)
- TOC v. TND, 46 P.3d 863 (Wyo. 2002) (3.03 requires trial court approval of settled statement)