Kenneth Eyer v. Idaho Forest Group
387 P.3d 75
| Idaho | 2016Background
- Kenneth and Sally Eyer contracted with Idaho Forest Group, LLC (IFG) in 2009 under a Log Purchase Agreement for sale of cut timber from the Eyers’ land.
- IFG’s representative (Berend) visited the property to assist in locating boundaries before logging. Loggers mistakenly cut timber from neighboring Stevens’ land.
- The Stevens sued the Eyers for timber trespass (seeking treble damages). The Eyers filed a third-party negligence claim against IFG alleging IFG assumed a duty to locate property lines; a jury found for IFG.
- After judgment for IFG, the district court awarded IFG $95,608 in attorney fees under Idaho Code § 12-120(3); the Eyers moved to alter or amend unsuccessfully and appealed.
- The Eyers argued the suit’s gravamen was not a commercial transaction and that their sale was not for a commercial purpose because proceeds were to pay medical bills. The Idaho Supreme Court affirmed the fee award and granted IFG appellate fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the gravamen of the Eyers’ claim is a "commercial transaction" under I.C. § 12-120(3) | Eyers: claim is tort (assumed duty) not contractual; thus not grounded in a commercial transaction | IFG: tort claims can still arise from and be grounded in commercial transactions; fee statute applies | Held: The commercial transaction was the gravamen; fees under § 12-120(3) are available despite tort pleading |
| Whether the Eyers entered the timber sale for a "commercial purpose" when proceeds would pay personal medical bills | Eyers: proceeds used for personal medical expenses, so transaction lacks commercial purpose | IFG: parties entered the sale to earn income; generating income is commercial regardless of how income was spent | Held: Selling timber to earn income qualifies as a commercial purpose; § 12-120(3) applies |
| Whether tortious conduct precludes fee recovery under § 12-120(3) | Eyers: tort claim should bar application of the commercial-transaction fee statute | IFG: statute covers commercial transactions even if torts are alleged | Held: Tort allegations do not preclude fee award when claim’s gravamen is a commercial transaction |
| Entitlement to appellate attorney fees | Eyers: requested fees under § 12-121 arguing IFG’s defense frivolous | IFG: sought appellate fees under § 12-120(3) as prevailing party in a commercial transaction | Held: IFG entitled to appellate fees under § 12-120(3); Eyers not entitled to fees |
Key Cases Cited
- Sims v. Jacobson, 157 Idaho 980, 342 P.3d 907 (discusses gravamen analysis for § 12-120(3))
- Blimka v. My Web Wholesaler, LLC, 143 Idaho 723, 152 P.3d 594 (fee statute applies to torts arising from commercial transactions)
- Bridge Tower Dental, P.A. v. Meridian Computer Ctr., Inc., 152 Idaho 569, 272 P.3d 541 (negligence claim grounded in a commercial transaction qualifies for fees)
- Carrillo v. Boise Tire Co., 152 Idaho 741, 274 P.3d 1256 (each party must enter transaction for a commercial purpose)
- Watson v. Watson, 144 Idaho 214, 159 P.3d 851 (logging to generate income characterized as commercial)
- Brown v. Greenheart, 157 Idaho 156, 335 P.3d 1 (commercial purpose analysis in land transaction context)
- Campbell v. Parkway Surgery Ctr., LLC, 158 Idaho 957, 364 P.3d 1172 (employment contract breaches are commercial transactions)
- City of McCall v. Buxton, 146 Idaho 656, 201 P.3d 629 (discusses mandatory-fee language of § 12-120(3))
- Frontier Dev. Grp., LLC v. Caravella, 157 Idaho 589, 338 P.3d 1193 (distinguishes purely personal-purpose transactions from commercial ones)