Erickson v. Crossroads Neighborhood Assoc
162 Idaho 824
Idaho Ct. App.2017Background
- Crossroads Neighborhood Association sued Erickson in magistrate court to enforce protective covenants; Erickson did not file an answer and default judgment was entered against him in July 2014.
- Erickson filed multiple post-judgment motions (including to set aside the default) and filed an intermediate appeal to the district court in September 2014.
- The district court ordered Erickson to pay for transcripts; a conditional dismissal was entered for nonpayment but was later vacated after Erickson paid and the appeal was reinstated.
- The district court stayed the appeal pending resolution of Erickson’s motion to set aside the default; the magistrate denied that motion and the district court then dismissed the appeal with prejudice when Erickson missed a briefing deadline.
- Erickson sought rehearing; the district court orally dissolved the stay and indicated it would reinstate the appeal and set a briefing schedule, but the written order reinstating the appeal was not filed until December 21, 2015—and transcripts were not actually produced.
- The Court of Appeals vacated the district court’s dismissal and remanded, concluding the briefing schedule was invalid, ordering production/settlement of transcripts, and awarding costs to Erickson.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court properly dismissed Erickson’s intermediate appeal for failure to timely file an appellant’s brief | Crossroads argued dismissal was proper for Erickson’s failure to meet the briefing deadline | Erickson argued he was entitled to 35 days after the transcripts were filed and the briefing schedule was invalid because the appeal had not been formally reinstated | Dismissal was improper; the November 20 briefing schedule was unenforceable because the appeal had not been entered; remand to reset 35-day briefing period |
| Whether transcripts were timely produced and whether the district court erred by not settling transcripts/timeframes | Crossroads implicitly relied on dismissal without showing transcript issues prevented briefing | Erickson argued transcripts were not produced despite payment and the district court failed to resolve transcript lodging/settlement | Court ordered remand to produce and settle transcripts before proceeding on appeal |
| Whether Crossroads lacked standing to sue | Crossroads maintained it had standing to enforce covenants | Erickson contended Crossroads lacked standing | Court declined to consider the standing claim because Erickson provided no supporting authority or developed argument |
| Whether attorney fees and costs on appeal should be awarded | Crossroads sought fees and costs | Erickson sought attorney fees and costs on appeal | Costs awarded to Erickson as prevailing party; attorney fees denied to both (Crossroads did not prevail; Erickson is pro se and not entitled to attorney fees) |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Zichko, 129 Idaho 259, 923 P.2d 966 (discussion that issues unsupported by authority will not be considered)
- Coeur d’Alene Turf Club, Inc. v. Cogswell, 93 Idaho 324, 461 P.2d 107 (district court divested of jurisdiction by appeal; may only act in aid of and not inconsistent with the appeal)
- Michalk v. Michalk, 148 Idaho 224, 220 P.3d 580 (pro se litigants are not entitled to attorney fees)
- Bowles v. Pro Indiviso, Inc., 132 Idaho 371, 973 P.2d 142 (awarding fees inappropriate when an appellant represented himself on appeal)