Kelley v. Yadon
150 Idaho 334
| Idaho | 2011Background
- Kelley spouses lacked funds to purchase a 670-acre farm and entered a lease with option with others for farm use.
- In 1992, the Kelleys orally agreed that Kim and Warren Yadon would purchase the farm in their names, while the Kelleys would pay loans, taxes, and farming expenses, with the farm to be deeded to the Kelleys when loans were paid.
- The Yadons took title to the farm; the Kelleys continued farming and reimbursed Yadons for loan payments when the Yadons paid late.
- By 1994 the Yadons held sole legal title to the farm; the Kelleys paid and operated the farm as agreed.
- In 2008 the Kelleys sued, recording lis pendens; Yadon counterclaimed for eviction and slander of title; Kim Yadon was joined as indispensable party.
- Trial court found a resulting trust in favor of the Kelleys and awarded costs; Yadon appealed challenging the trust, eviction denial, and fee awards.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a resulting trust was properly found | Kelleys assert they paid in absolute obligation repayment for the property. | Yadon contends no binding absolute obligation to repay was proven, especially without a written agreement. | Yes; court affirmed finding of resulting trust. |
| Whether eviction denial was proper | Because Kelleys are beneficial owners, they possess the farm and eviction is improper. | Yadon argues for eviction based on ownership and lack of tenancy. | Denying eviction was proper. |
| Whether attorney-fee costs to Kelleys were proper | Kelleys seek costs including attorney fees as prevailing party. | Yadon did not timely object; appellate fee argument contested. | Court allowed costs to Kelleys; fees generally awarded as prevailing party. |
| Whether any party is entitled to attorney fees on appeal | Kelleys seek fees on appeal under §12-121; Crowley standard cited. | Yadon argues no fee entitlement; lacks argument support. | Kelleys awarded attorney fees on appeal; Kim Yadon denied; Yadon denied for lack of argument. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hettinga v. Sybrandy, 126 Idaho 467 (1994) (recognizes potential for resulting trust where beneficiary pays purchase price or incurs binding obligation)
- Pittock v. Pittock, 15 Idaho 426 (1908) (oral arrangements can create a resulting trust when purchase money is advanced for another)
- Crowley v. Critchfield, 145 Idaho 509 (2007) (attorney fees on appeal under §12-121 for frivolous or weight-of-evidence challenges)
- Carroll v. MBNA America Bank, 148 Idaho 261 (2009) (need for argument and authority to support fee requests on appeal)