McDougall, et al. v. AgCountry Farm Credit Services, PCA, et al.
- Michael McDougall and Bonita McDougall, Plaintiffs and Appellants
AgCountry Farm Credit Services, PCA, Defendant, Third-Party Plaintiff,
Any person in possession, and All persons
unknown, claiming any estate or interest in,
or lien or encumbrance upon, the real estate
described in the Third Party Complaint, Third-Party Defendants
- Case Type
- CIVIL APPEAL : CONTRACTS
- Appeal From
Case No. 2018-CV-00045
Northeast Judicial District, Towner County
Donovan John Foughty
Parties' Statement of Issues
1. Did the district court err in granting summary judgment in favor of AgCountry on McDougalls’ deceit claims, premised upon the conclusion that the statute of frauds bars deceit claims?
2. Did the district court err in granting summary judgment in favor of AgCountry on McDougalls’ unjust enrichment claims, concluding that there was an absence of justification and an adequate remedy provided by law?
I. Whether the District Court correctly determined that the McDougalls’ deceit claims are barred by the statute of frauds.
II. Whether the District Court correctly dismissed McDougalls’ unjust enrichment claims.
III. Whether the McDougalls’ deceit claims are barred because they cannot show any direct communications with AgCountry about Kent and Erica McDougalls’ financial condition.
IV. Whether the McDougalls’ claims are barred by collateral estoppel.
V. Whether the McDougalls’ failure to appeal the judgment as to AgCountry’s Counterclaims waives their arguments on the issues they have raised on appeal.
VI. Whether, in the event this court reverses the Judgment, remand is appropriate.
Michael and Bonita McDougall appeal from a judgment dismissing their claims against AgCountry Farm Credit Services and finding in favor of AgCountry on its claims to enforce assignment of rents and to foreclose a mortgage.
The McDougalls sued AgCountry, requesting the district court declare a mortgage on their property was void. The McDougalls also sought damages on claims of deceit, conversion, estoppel, and unjust enrichment. AgCountry answered and counterclaimed, seeking to enforce an assignment of rents and foreclose the mortgage on the property. Both parties moved for summary judgment. After a hearing, the district court granted summary judgment in favor of AgCountry, dismissing the McDougalls’ claims of conversion, estoppel, unjust enrichment, and deceit. The court also ordered AgCountry’s mortgage was superior and granted foreclose of the mortgage. The court later awarded AgCountry $7,000 for rent. Judgment was entered.
On appeal, the McDougalls argue the district court erred in dismissing their claims of deceit and unjust enrichment.
(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)
|Seq. #||Filing Date||Description||Attachment|
|1||05/02/2019||NOTICE OF APPEAL : 05/02/2019|
|2||05/06/2019||NOT. OF FILING NOT. OF APPEAL AND PROOF OF SERV.|
|3||05/06/2019||Notice served on Kip M. Kaler and John D. Schroeder|
|4||05/29/2019||ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED MAY 28, 2019 (ENTRY NOS. 1-132)|
|5||06/11/2019||MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF|
|6||06/11/2019||ACTION BY CLERK - Granted : 06/21/2019|
|7||06/20/2019||ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED JUNE 19, 2019 (ENTRY NOS. 134-137 )|
|10||06/24/2019||AMENDED ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED JUNE 24, 2019 (ENTRY NOS.133-138)|
|11||06/25/2019||Received copies of ATB & ATA from Central Duplicating|
|12||06/25/2019||Rec'd corrections to Appellant's Brief (oral argument requested)|
|13||06/25/2019||Oral Argument Request by Appellants|
|14||07/17/2019||MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLEE BRIEF|
|15||07/17/2019||ACTION BY CLERK - Granted : 07/29/2019|
|16||08/01/2019||2ND ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED JULY 31, 2019 (ENTRY NOS. #139 - #144 )|
|18||07/29/2019||Oral Argument Request by Appellee|
|20||08/05/2019||Rec'd non-substantivce corrections for AEB|
|21||08/06/2019||3RD ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED AUGUST 5, 2019 (ENTRY NOS. # 145 - # 147)|
|22||08/06/2019||Rec'd 6 copies of ATB and ATA back from Central Duplicating|
|23||08/12/2019||MOT. EXT/TIME REPLY BRIEF|
|24||08/12/2019||ACTION BY CLERK - Granted : 08/19/2019|
|25||08/15/2019||MOTION to Expand Page Limitation (for reply brief)|
|26||08/15/2019||ACTION BY CHIEF JUSTICE (total of 15 pages) - Granted|
|28||08/22/2019||Requested non-substantive correction to RYB - Certificate of Compliance|
|29||08/22/2019||Rec'd Certificate of Compliance with service doc for Reply Brief|
|30||08/23/2019||Rec'd 6 copies of RYB from Central Duplicating|
|31||09/13/2019||MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT RECORD - RspDue : 09/27/2019|
|32||09/25/2019||Response Filed to Motion to Supplement Record|
|33||10/02/2019||ACTION BY SUPREME COURT - Denied|
|34||10/31/2019||APPEARANCES: Kip Kaler & Patrick Sinner/John Schroeder & Appellee|
|36||10/31/2019||Case argued at UND School of Law|
|37||12/06/2019||4TH ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED DECEMBER 5, 2019 (ENTRY NOS. 148-151)|