State v. Beane
2011 ND 80
| N.D. | 2011Background
- Smestad and Harris had a personal and business relationship from spring 2007 to late 2008; Smestad moved into Harris's home in Nov 2007.
- Smestad wrote numerous checks to Harris and Oasis during the relationship, using two checking accounts.
- Smestad alleged she loaned Harris $30,025 for which there was an understanding of repayment; Harris claimed the funds compensated for work on properties, not loans.
- District court found Smestad credible, concluded an oral agreement to repay $30,025 existed, and awarded Smestad $30,025; counterclaims were dismissed.
- Statute of frauds defense was raised; the court did not address it, but the appellate court later held the oral loan agreement unenforceable under NDCC § 9-06-04(4).
- Court remanded to consider Smestad’s equitable relief claim and to determine whether additional equitable relief should be awarded, with Rule 63 certification.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enforceability of the oral loan under the statute of frauds | Smestad asserts an oral loan was made and enforceable. | Harris argues the oral loan falls within the statute of frauds and is unenforceable because the aggregate loans exceed $25,000. | Oral loan unenforceable under statute of frauds |
| Support for the trial court's factual findings on the loan | Smestad's evidence (checks, records) supports an oral repayment agreement. | Harris contends his version should be credited; the court erred in credibility. | District court findings not clearly erroneous |
| Counterclaims and damages | Smestad seeks repayment and potentially other equitable relief. | Harris failed to prove his counterclaims and damages. | Counterclaims rejected; no damages established |
| Remand for equitable relief | Equitable relief may be warranted for unjust enrichment. | Remand should be limited to procedural and statutory considerations. | Remanded to consider equitable relief and Rule 63 certification |
Key Cases Cited
- First State Bank v. Oster, 500 N.W.2d 593 (N.D. 1993) (aggregate loans trigger statute of frauds unenforceability)
- Kuntz v. Kuntz, 595 N.W.2d 292 (N.D. 1999) (oral agreements not in writing subject to statute of frauds)
- Jerry Harmon Motors, Inc. v. First Nat'l Bank & Trust Co., 472 N.W.2d 748 (N.D. 1991) (statute of frauds defense relevant to loans)
- Nelson v. TMH, Inc., 292 N.W.2d 580 (N.D. 1980) (direct personal benefit exception to statute of frauds)
- Baldus v. Mattern, 93 N.W.2d 144 (N.D. 1958) (statute of frauds affects remedy, not voids contract overall)
- In re Maedche, 788 N.W.2d 331 (N.D. 2010) (credibility determinations and appellate review standards)
- Clark v. Clark, 704 N.W.2d 847 (N.D. 2005) (Rule 63 certification on remand when judge cannot proceed)
- Olsrud v. Bismarck-Mandan Orchestral Ass’n, 733 N.W.2d 256 (N.D. 2007) (adequacy of argument and briefing standards on appeal)
- Murphy v. Rossow, 787 N.W.2d 746 (N.D. 2010) (review of credibility and evidence standard)