Green River Ranches, LLC v. Silva Land Co.
162 Idaho 385
| Idaho | 2017Background
- Between 2009–2012 McCall and Silva family entities conducted multiple cattle-related transactions: Silva Dairy managed McCall’s herd, McCall supplied feed, and Silva Dairy pastured cattle on McCall’s land; most agreements were oral and informal.
- Silva Dairy filed Chapter 12 bankruptcy in 2010 and later confirmed a plan; the district court’s remedies against Silva Dairy were limited to offsets (no affirmative recovery due to bankruptcy).
- Disputes produced consolidated litigation: Green River Ranches loan claim, McCall’s suit against Max Silva and Silva Dairy (conversion of feed, pasture rent, feed payments), and Silva Dairy’s third-party/herd-management claim seeking ~$245,000.
- After bench trials, the district court found Silva Dairy entitled to $204,977.65 for herd management but concluded McCall had claims (pasture rent and converted feed) that more than offset that amount; the court found at least $413,953 of McCall’s feed was converted and $52,386.90 in pasture rent owed by Silva Dairy.
- The district court dismissed Silva Dairy’s herd-management claim with prejudice as fully offset and denied Silva Dairy fees; Silva Dairy appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Silva Dairy) | Defendant's Argument (McCall) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Silva Dairy’s use of commingled feed amounted to conversion and offset Silva Dairy’s herd‑management claim | No wrongful dominion; McCall authorized commingling and McCall did not prove feed was missing | Silva Dairy depleted McCall’s deposited feed below what remained after reasonable consumption; expert evidence supports a substantial deficit | Court affirmed conversion finding: Silva Dairy converted at least $413,953 and that amount offsets Silva Dairy’s claim |
| Whether pasture‑rent liability could be assigned from Max Silva to Silva Dairy without formal amendment | Assignment improper because district previously denied amendment to add Silva Dairy to pasture claim | Issue was tried by implied consent; pretrial order and trial evidence addressed which party incurred pasture debt | Court affirmed: district did not abuse discretion in holding Silva Dairy liable for $52,386.90 pasture rent |
| Whether district abused discretion by denying Silva Dairy attorney’s fees below | Silva Dairy sought fees but did not prevail below | McCall argued Silva Dairy lost, so fees were properly denied | Court affirmed denial of fees to Silva Dairy |
| Whether prevailing party is entitled to fees and costs on appeal | Silva Dairy sought appellate fees | McCall sought fees under Idaho statutory and appellate rules as prevailing party in commercial transaction | Court awarded costs and attorney’s fees on appeal to McCall under Idaho Code §12-120(3) and appellate rules |
Key Cases Cited
- Torix v. Allred, 100 Idaho 905 (1980) (authorization to act can negate wrongful dominion required for conversion)
- Carver v. Ketchum, 53 Idaho 595 (1933) (conversion defined as wrongful dominion over another’s chattels)
- Kugler v. Nelson, 160 Idaho 408 (2016) (Idaho Code §12-120(3) awards fees to prevailing party in commercial transactions)
- Prehn v. Hodge, 161 Idaho 321 (2016) (clarifies scope of "commercial transaction" under §12-120(3))