Kettle Butte Trucking LLC v. Steven A. Kelly & Spirit Energy LLC
2018 ND 110
| N.D. | 2018Background
- Kettle Butte Trucking (KBT) sued Spirit Energy LLC and Steven Kelly for unpaid truck lease payments and sought immediate possession of leased vehicles plus money judgment.
- The district court issued an order to show cause and then an amended order directing Spirit to stop using the vehicles, disclose their location, and arrange delivery to KBT; sheriffs were authorized to seize the vehicles without bond.
- Spirit refused to comply, arguing the vehicles were on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation, tribal law governs repossession there, and the state court order was void for lack of jurisdiction.
- KBT moved to hold Spirit in civil contempt; the district court found Spirit in contempt, gave a seven-day purge period to deliver the vehicles, and imposed a $100 daily forfeiture thereafter.
- Spirit appealed the contempt order and challenged the underlying amended order and the district court’s jurisdiction to order repossession on tribal land.
- The Supreme Court of North Dakota affirmed the contempt order, holding Spirit could not avoid compliance with a court order by asserting in the first instance that the order was erroneous or that tribal law applied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appealability of contempt order | KBT relied on contempt to enforce possession and argued appeal proper | Spirit appealed the contempt order; contested underlying order separately | Contempt orders are final and appealable; Spirit properly appealed contempt but may not relitigate interlocutory underlying order on that appeal |
| Whether Spirit could challenge the underlying amended order in contempt appeal | KBT: contempt appeal should focus on compliance, not relitigation | Spirit: underlying order was void for lack of jurisdiction because vehicles on reservation and tribal law controls repossession | Court: issues attacking an interlocutory underlying order are not cognizable on appeal from contempt when no separate appeal of that order was timely taken |
| Whether Spirit’s noncompliance constituted contempt (willfulness) | KBT: Spirit willfully refused to surrender vehicles as ordered | Spirit: refusal excused because order was void/violated tribal law | Court: contempt proven; a party must obey an order while it remains in force even if erroneous; refusal was willful and inexcusable |
| Whether district court could order a party to return property located on tribal land | KBT: court can order a party (over whom it has personal jurisdiction) to act even if property lies outside territorial reach | Spirit: court lacked authority to order repossession of property on reservation and would circumvent tribal law | Court: unnecessary to decide full territorial jurisdiction; court may order a party under its personal jurisdiction to return property and sanction noncompliance; analogous precedents permit coercion of a party to act regarding property outside jurisdiction |
Key Cases Cited
- Everett v. State, 892 N.W.2d 898 (2017) (appealability and jurisdictional principles)
- Nygaard v. Taylor, 900 N.W.2d 833 (2017) (district court may sanction contempt even when subject property is on reservation)
- Peterson v. Schulz, 896 N.W.2d 916 (2017) (standard for proving civil contempt)
- Flattum-Riemers v. Flattum-Riemers, 598 N.W.2d 499 (1999) (party must obey court order while it remains in force; inability to relitigate underlying order in contempt appeal)
- PHI Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Johnston Law Office, P.C., 881 N.W.2d 216 (2016) (appellate review standard for contempt findings)
- Ronngren v. Beste, 483 N.W.2d 191 (N.D. 1992) (contempt orders are final and specially appealable)
- Carpenter v. Strange, 141 U.S. 87 (1891) (equity courts may coerce a person to act regarding property not within the court’s territorial jurisdiction)