LD III LLC v. Beverly Jean Black Davis
385 P.3d 689
Utah Ct. App.2016Background
- LD III, LLC entered into a 2007 real estate purchase and later refused to close after a district court granted a motion enforcing a settlement and ordered LD III to close by September 30, 2008.
- The September 23, 2008 order warned that if LD III did not close by September 30 the court would quiet title in favor of Davis; LD III argued that this language gave it an option to allow quiet title instead of closing.
- LD III did not close by the deadline and continued to refuse until the district court granted a stay pending appeal on October 22, 2008 (LD III had posted security and pledged the property to indemnify Davis for damages arising from non‑closing).
- Earlier appellate proceedings found LD III was denied due process on contempt, and this matter was remanded for further findings about knowledge, ability to comply, and willfulness.
- On remand the district court found LD III knew what was required, had the ability to comply, intentionally refused to close, and therefore reinstated contempt and confirmed damages and attorney fees; LD III appealed.
Issues and Key Cases Cited
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the September 23 order allowed LD III to choose quiet title instead of closing | LD III: order was self‑executing; quiet title was an alternative to closing | Davis: the language warned of a consequence, not an option; LD III was required to close | Court: order did not give LD III an option; court’s finding LD III knew requirement affirmed |
| Whether LD III purged contempt by later offering to close after this court’s prior opinion | LD III: it attempted to comply and requested to close after appellate decision | Davis: contempt based on conduct between Sept. 30 and Oct. 22, 2008; belated efforts do not purge earlier contempt | Court: contempt stood for the pre‑stay period; belated attempts did not purge earlier contempt |
| Whether reliance on counsel excuses contempt | LD III: relied on attorneys’ advice to allow quiet title instead of closing | Davis: testimony claiming advice was discredited; reliance defense unsupported | Court: two witnesses were not credible; no reliable evidence of advice‑of‑counsel defense; contempt stands |
| Sufficiency of damages and attorney‑fee awards | LD III: damages speculative and fees excessive | Davis: awards supported by evidence and underlying findings | Court: LD III failed to marshal record evidence and inadequately briefed challenges; awards affirmed; remand for appellate fee calculation |
Key Cases Cited
- Von Hake v. Thomas, 759 P.2d 1162 (Utah 1988) (elements for contempt: knowledge of requirement, ability to comply, intentional failure)
- Race v. Race, 740 P.2d 253 (Utah 1987) (belated compliance does not necessarily purge contempt)
- Nunley v. Westates Casing Servs., Inc., 989 P.2d 1077 (Utah 1999) (standard for clear‑error review of factual findings)
- Hi‑Country Estates Homeowners Ass’n v. Bagley & Co., 182 P.3d 417 (Utah Ct. App. 2008) (appellant must marshal evidence supporting challenge to findings)
- Lamar v. Lamar, 292 P.3d 86 (Utah Ct. App. 2012) (damages review depends on factual findings)
- State v. Nielsen, 326 P.3d 645 (Utah 2014) (appellate burden to address evidence supporting adverse findings)