CR WEAVER v. Advanced Refrigeration
257 P.3d 378
| Mont. | 2011Background
- Weaver, representing Glacier Kitchens, purchased a propane-use coffee urn from ARS.
- Glacier Kitchens' owner Weaver held 90% of the Glacier Kitchens stock; Glacier Kitchens was involuntarily dissolved in 2009.
- The urn was ultimately sourced from Wilbur Curtis Manufacturing; it malfunctioned because it was built for natural gas instead of propane.
- USFS contract with Glacier Kitchens was terminated, allegedly due to the urn's malfunction.
- Weaver sued ARS and Wilbur Curtis for breach of contract, seeking damages under the Glacier Kitchens-USFS contract, not ARS's or Wilbur Curtis's direct contract.
- The District Court granted summary judgment against Weaver, ruling he lacked standing to sue on Glacier Kitchens' contract; judgments were entered December 1, 2010 (Wilbur Curtis) and January 18, 2011 (ARS).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the district court err in granting summary judgment to ARS and Wilbur Curtis? | Weaver argues he may sue individually due to Glacier Kitchens being dissolved/defunct and seeks amendment rights. | ARS and Wilbur Curtis contend Weaver, as Glacier Kitchens shareholder, cannot sue for corporate claims; scheduling deadlines limit amendments. | Affirmed summary judgments for ARS and Wilbur Curtis. |
| Was the district court proper in awarding costs to ARS and Wilbur Curtis? | Weaver seeks reversal of cost awards; claims procedural/level of award issues remain unresolved. | Costs awarded are proper; no attorney fees awarded; no argument of error shown. | Affirmed cost awards to ARS and Wilbur Curtis. |
Key Cases Cited
- Old Elk v. Healthy Mothers, Healthy Babies, Inc., 2003 MT 167 (Mont.) (standard of review for summary judgment)
- Farm Credit Bank of Spokane v. Hill, 266 Mont. 258 (Mont. 1993) (pleadings binding; statute of limitations timelines)
- Textana, Inc. v. Klabzuba Oil & Gas, 2009 MT 401 (Mont. 2009) (amendment of pleadings scheduling and prejudice considerations)
- Lindey's v. Professional Consultants, 244 Mont. 238 (Mont. 1990) (factors affecting amendment decisions)
- Kershaw v. Mont. Dept. of Transportation, 2011 MT 170 (Mont. 2011) (avoidance of prejudice and timeliness in amendments)
- Bradley v. Crow Tribe of Indians, 2005 MT 309 (Mont. 2005) (contract damages principles)
- Zempel v. Liberty, 2006 MT 220 (Mont. 2006) (non-lawyer representation limits in district court)
- Textana, Inc. v. Klabzuba Oil & Gas, 353 Mont. 442 (Mont. 2009) (amendment and scheduling considerations)