Kuhn v. COLDWELL BANKER LANDMARK, INC.
150 Idaho 240
| Idaho | 2010Background
- Kuhn and Schei engaged in a multi-party real estate transaction in 1997 involving Landmark and agents Bohn, Merzlock, Fisher; several related financing arrangements and deeds/trusts accompanied the Manning Lane and Mountain Park properties.
- Kuhns acquired Manning Lane via warranty deed to the Kuhns; Mountain Park was leased to Scheis with option to purchase, and related notes/deeds of trust were executed to secure financing.
- Scheis later defaulted on the Mountain Park lease, triggering foreclosures and a $20,000 deficiency against the Kuhns.
- Respondents sued for breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, breach of contract, unjust enrichment, fraud, misrepresentation, and punitive damages; trial yielded a large jury verdict against appellants (Bohn, Merzlock, Landmark) and others.
- The district court denied post-trial motions including motions for J.N.O.V., new trial, Rule 59(e), Rule 60(b)(3), and denied/limited some evidentiary and punitive-damages issues; judgment and punitive damages were upheld with some reduction of attorney fees on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the district court err in denying post-trial motions? | Kuhn argued motions should have been granted on grounds including improper verdict, evidence, and calculation. | Appellants argued errors in jury instructions, evidentiary rulings, and damages. | No reversible error; post-trial denials affirmed except for attorney-fee issue addressed later. |
| Was the jury verdict properly supported and damages correctly calculated? | Respondents claim substantial evidence supports fiduciary, negligence, and contract damages; punitive damages warranted. | Appellants contend evidence and damages were miscalculated and punitive amounts excessive. | Verdict supported; punitive damages upheld but remanded to exclude improper attorney-fee award to a disqualified attorney. |
| Did the court err in evidentiary rulings affecting expert testimony and witness statements? | Respondents contend Manning's expert testimony and other evidence were properly admitted to show outrageous conduct. | Appellants challenge exclusion of certain testimony and adherence to Rockefeller standards. | Court proper to admit expert testimony on outrageous conduct; some evidentiary exclusions affirmed, others deemed non-prejudicial. |
| Was the punitive-damages review due to due-process concerns properly conducted? | Punitive damages reasonably related to egregious conduct and fiduciary breach. | Amounts were excessive and the special verdict form obscured allocation issues. | Due-process review unable to determine excessiveness due to flawed verdict form; court declined to rule on excessiveness site-specifically. |
| Was the district court’s award of attorney fees proper? | Fees appropriate under contract; prevailing party entitlement. | At issue was improper post-disqualification fees for a disqualified attorney. | Fees upheld under contract; remand to exclude fees incurred after attorney disqualification. |
Key Cases Cited
- Schwan's Sales Enters., Inc. v. Idaho Transp. Dep't, 142 Idaho 826 (2006) (standard for J.N.O.V. review; substantial evidence suffices for verdicts)
- Rockefeller v. Grabow (Rockefeller II), 139 Idaho 538 (2003) (real estate agent fiduciary/commission considerations; inform about commissions as equitable restitution)
- Rockefeller v. Grabow (Rockefeller I), 136 Idaho 637 (2001) (exclusion of expert standard-of-care testimony; limits on legal standards by experts)
- Quick v. Crane, 111 Idaho 759 (1986) (new-trial standard for damages based on passion or prejudice; disparity analysis)
- Walston v. Monumental Life Ins. Co., 129 Idaho 211 (1996) (punitive damages standards and reprehensibility guidance)
- Gunter v. Murphy's Lounge, LLC, 141 Idaho 16 (2005) (review of punitive-damages awards; sufficiency of evidence)
- Hall v. Farmers Alliance, Mut. Ins. Co., 145 Idaho 313 (2008) (due-process review of punitive damages; evidentiary standards)
- Jeremiah v. Yanke Mach. Shop, Inc., 131 Idaho 242 (1998) (exclusion of public-records/hearsay under evidentiary rules)