Summary
The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment dismissing the Kleins’ quiet title, breach of contract, and fraud claims concerning an alleged oral agreement to repurchase real property. The court held that the alleged agreement was subject to the statute of frauds, that the Kleins failed to present competent admissible evidence of a valid enforceable contract, and that the fraud claim was barred by the statute of limitations. The court also concluded that any failure to resolve the parties’ deposition motions was harmless and did not constitute reversible error.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether summary judgment was proper on the Kleins' quiet-title and breach-of-contract claims when the alleged agreement to repurchase real property was oral and did not satisfy the statute of frauds.
- Whether the Kleins could rely on partial performance to avoid the statute of frauds when that theory was raised for the first time on appeal.
- Whether the Kleins' fraud claim was barred by the six-year statute of limitations under the discovery rule.
- Whether the district court committed reversible error by failing to rule on the Kleins' motion to compel depositions.
Holdings
- Summary judgment was proper because the alleged oral agreement concerned the sale of real property and performance beyond one year, did not comply with the statute of frauds, and the Kleins presented no competent admissible evidence establishing a valid and enforceable contract.
- The Supreme Court declined to consider the Kleins' partial-performance argument because they did not raise that theory in the district court.
- The fraud claim was barred because the Kleins knew in 2002 that a portion of the property had been sold, placing them on notice of a potential claim, and they did not sue until 2014, after the six-year limitations period had expired.
- The district court's failure to decide the deposition motions did not constitute reversible error because the parties had agreed to resolve the issue through a stipulation, and any error was invited by the parties and harmless.
Key quotations
“Summary judgment is a procedural device for the prompt resolution of a controversy on the merits without a trial if there are no genuine issues of material fact or inferences that can reasonably be drawn from undisputed facts, or if the only issues to be resolved are questions of law.” (¶ 7)
“an act of partial performance that unmistakably point[ed] to the existence of the claimed agreement, that was consistent only with the terms and existence of the alleged contract, and that could not be accounted for on some other hypothesis.” (¶ 11)
Factual background
In 1993, Kevin Klein transferred McHenry County real property to Glen and Norine Sletto by recorded warranty deed. The Kleins later alleged that Glen Sletto had orally agreed Kevin could repurchase the property for approximately $50,000 after leasing it for ten years, but no written agreement existed. Portions of the property were later transferred or sold, including a 2002 sale to Donald Schmidt, of which Kevin Klein was aware. The Kleins sued in 2014 for quiet title, breach of contract, and fraud.
Procedural history
The Kleins sued in January 2014, seeking to quiet title and damages for alleged breach of an oral contract and fraud arising from a 1993 transfer of real property. The defendants moved for summary judgment, asserting the statute of frauds and statutes of limitations barred the claims. The district court granted summary judgment in November 2015. During the appeal, the Supreme Court remanded for the limited purpose of addressing correction of the record concerning unresolved deposition motions; the record was supplemented with documents showing the parties had stipulated to a protective order preventing the depositions. The Supreme Court affirmed.