Rutherford v. BNSF Railway Co.
Classic Roadsters, Ltd., Plaintiff and Appellant
v.
BNSF Railway Company, Defendant and Appellee
Judge Frank L. Racek
| Appellant: | Kelsch, Kelsch, Ruff & Kranda | |
| Appellee: | Nilles, Plambeck, Selbo & Harrie, Ltd. |
Listen to recording of oral argument
using RealPlayer Basic,© a free download.
I. Did the trial court err in failing to find that genuine issues of material fact exist as to whether Rutherford is entitled to economic relief, pursuant to the doctrine of equitable estoppel, for BNSF's taking of his building?
A. There are genuine issues of material fact as to whether BN's and/or BNSF's conduct, intent, and knowledge was sufficient to establish that BNSF should be estopped from taking Rutherford's building without providing just compensation.
B. There are genuine issues of material fact as to whether Rutherford lacked the appropriate knowledge, relied in good faith, and acted, or failed to act, insofar that BNSF should be estopped from taking Rutherford's building without providing just compensation.
C. Rutherford properly pled estoppel before the trial court.
II. Were BNSF's statute of limitation defenses precluded by the doctrine of equitable estoppel?
A. The trial court should have found that BN' and BNSF's statements and conduct regarding the lease agreement precluded BNSF's statute of limitation defense and that such statements and conduct presented genuine issues of material fact for Rutherford's claims arising from the lease.
B. The trial court should have found that BN's and BNSF's statements and conduct regarding the issue of contamination on the property, precluded BNSF's statute of limitations defense and that such statements and conduct presented genuine issues of material fact on Rutherford's claims arising from the presence of contamination on the leased land underlying his building.
III. Is Rutherford's "practice argument" precluded by the parol evidence rule?
IV. Did the trial court err in granting BNSF's Motion for Summary Judgment?
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
1.Whether Plaintiff/Appellant Gary Rutherford d/b/a Classics Roadsters, Ltd. ("Rutherford") is precluded from raising the doctrine of equitable estoppel for the first time on appeal.
2.Whether, in the event the Court considers equitable estoppel, the doctrine precludes BNSF from enforcing the terms of the lease with Rutherford.
3.Whether, in the event the Court considers equitable estoppel, the doctrine precludes application of the statute of limitations.
Add Docket 20080237 RSS