FREE ELECTRONIC LIBRARY - Online materials, documents

Pages:   || 2 |

«This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. § 480A.08, subd. 3 (2006). STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF ...»

-- [ Page 1 ] --

This opinion will be unpublished and

may not be cited except as provided by

Minn. Stat. § 480A.08, subd. 3 (2006).




Gene Allen,



N. Bruce Thom,


Varistar Corporation, et al.,


Thomas Mikal Snortland,


Filed July 15, 2008


Ross, Judge Otter Tail County District Court File No. 56-C1-07-000485 Timothy D. Kelly, Paul Hannah, Sarah E. Bushnell, Kelly & Berens, P.A., 3720 IDS Center, 80 South Eighth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55402 (for appellant) Sidney J. Spaeth, Vogel Law Firm, 218 NP Avenue, P.O. Box 1389, Fargo, ND 58107 (for respondent N. Bruce Thom) Todd E. Zimmerman, Benjamin J. Hasbrouck, Dorsey & Whitney, LLP, 51B North Broadway, Suite 402, P.O. 1344, Fargo, ND 58107-1344 (for respondents Varistar Corporation and Lauris N. Molbert) Michael D. McNair, McNair, Larson & Carlson, Ltd., 51 Broadway, Suite 600, P.O. 2189, Fargo, ND 58108 (for respondent Thomas Mikal Snortland) Considered and decided by Ross, Presiding Judge; Connolly, Judge; and Collins, Judge.


ROSS, Judge This appeal arises from a dispute over ownership interests in the Fargo-Moorhead RedHawks baseball team. Gene Allen appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his claims for breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Allen’s claims arise from a settlement agreement between Allen and Varistar Corporation, which resolved a prior dispute over the value of two Limited Liability Companies (together “the RedHawks”) in which Allen owned a minority interest. Under the terms of the settlement agreement, Varistar paid Allen for his ownership interest and gave Allen the right to a portion of the sale price of the RedHawks if Varistar sold them for more than $2.5 million. Allen’s complaint asserts that Varistar sold the RedHawks to N. Bruce Thom, Varistar’s departing chief executive officer, for $1.7 million, which is an amount that Allen claims was significantly less than the fair market value of the team. The complaint asserts that Varistar’s alleged bargain-price sale to a corporate insider breached the settlement agreement and the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The district court dismissed Allen’s claims because it concluded that the plain terms of the settlement agreement imposed no duty on Varistar to sell the team for more than $2.5 million. We have weighed the very well-presented arguments of all parties, and we affirm.

–  –  –

The parties refer to Fargo Baseball LLC and Fargo Sports Concessions LLC as the Fargo-Moorhead RedHawks, a minor-league baseball team. Allen owned 15 percent of the RedHawks and had an option to purchase an additional 10 percent, while Varistar owned the remaining 85 percent.

The parties entered into a settlement agreement to resolve a valuation dispute, and that prior dispute and settlement underlie the current dispute. Allen had asserted that the team was worth $4.3 million, and Varistar asserted that it was worth between $2 million and $2.3 million. In April 2000, Allen settled with Varistar; with N. Bruce Thom, who is Varistar’s chief executive officer; and with Lauris Molbert, the chief operating officer of Varistar’s parent company. Under the settlement agreement, Allen sold his ownership interest and his purchase option to Varistar for $600,000 and for the right to 25 percent of any portion of the RedHawks’ eventual sale price exceeding $2.5 million. The settlement agreement imposed no duty on Varistar to sell the team at all, and it specified no method for it to establish a sale price in the event of a sale. Four years later, Varistar sold the RedHawks to Thom for significantly less than $2.5 million, triggering this dispute.

The 2004 sale coincided with Thom’s retirement from Varistar. Varistar sold the RedHawks to Thom and co-investors, including respondent Thomas Mikal Snortland, for $1.7 million and a debt assumption of $50,000. Allen’s complaint alleges that by 2004 the team had a fair market value of $4.5 million, and it notes that the $1.7 million sale price is lower than the team value that Varistar had asserted during the 1999-2000 valuation dispute.

Allen claims that investors would have paid more than $1.7 million, but he does not allege that any investor known to Varistar would have paid $4.5 million, or even $2.5 million.

Allen sued Varistar, Thom, Molbert, and Thomas Snortland, claiming breach of the settlement agreement, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, conversion, and intentional interference with economic relations. The district court dismissed all of his claims for failing to state a claim on which relief could be granted.

In dismissing Allen’s breach-of-contract claim, the district court noted that the settlement agreement required additional payment to Allen only if Varistar sold the RedHawks for more than $2.5 million. Because Allen’s complaint stated that the team sold for $1.7 million, the court held that there was no duty to pay, and therefore no breach. In dismissing Allen’s claim of breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, the district court reasoned that the implied covenant of good faith does not extend to actions beyond the scope of the contract. See In re Hennepin County 1986 Recycling Bond Litig., 540 N.W.2d 494, 503 (Minn. 1995) (noting that the scope of an underlying contract limits the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing). Because the settlement agreement contained no provision requiring a fair-market appraisal or open-market sale of the team, the district court concluded that Allen’s claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing was beyond the scope of the contract’s terms and should be dismissed.

Allen appeals the dismissal of his claims for breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, but he does not challenge the district court’s dismissal of his other claims.

–  –  –

We review de novo a dismissal on the pleadings. Bodah v. Lakeville Motor Express, Inc., 663 N.W.2d 550, 553 (Minn. 2003). And we treat the facts in the complaint as true.

Loftus v. Hennepin County, 591 N.W.2d 514, 516 (Minn. App. 1999), review denied (Minn.

June 29, 1999). A district court must dismiss a claim under rule 12.02(e) of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure if the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The rule does not authorize dismissal “if it is possible on any evidence which might be produced, consistent with the pleader’s theory, to grant the relief demanded.” Doyle v. Kuch, 611 N.W.2d 28, 31 (Minn. App. 2000); see also Elzie v. Comm’r of Pub.

Safety, 298 N.W.2d 29, 32 (Minn. 1980) (“[A] pleading will be dismissed only if it appears to a certainty that no facts, which could be introduced consistent with the pleading, exist which would support granting the relief demanded.”).

Allen’s two arguments in the district court and on appeal both regard breach of contract, although they are presented in separate terms as breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. A breach of the implied covenant is itself a breach of the contract. A breach of contract occurs when contract performance is hindered or rendered impossible by a party. Minnwest Bank Cent. v. Flagship Props. LLC, 689 N.W.2d 295, 303 (Minn. App. 2004). “Stated differently, every contract contains an implied condition that each party will not unjustifiably hinder the other from performing.” Zobel & Dahl Const. v. Crotty, 356 N.W.2d 42, 45 (Minn. 1984). It is partly for this reason that “every contract includes an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.” In re Hennepin County 1986 Recycling Bond Litig., 540 N.W.2d at 502. We will address Allen’s arguments for breach first considering the allegedly violated express terms of the contract, and then the implied terms.

–  –  –

Allen argues that the district court erred by dismissing his claim of breach of contract on the theory that the $1.7 million sale price does not accurately reflect Thom’s actual purchase price. Allen essentially contends that Varistar breached an express term of the contract by failing to pay him after selling the RedHawks to Thom for more than the $1.7 million face value of the sale agreement. This argument develops in stages. In his opening brief, Allen pointed out that “[t]here is no reference whatsoever to the insider nature of the deal in the [district court’s] Memorandum” dismissing the complaint. And he added that “[o]ne can read the Memorandum without ever getting the sense that the sale...

was by a boss to his subordinate executive as part of the retirement of that executive from a parent company.” (Emphasis added). In his reply brief, Allen made the argument more expressly: “Varistar received not only $1.7 million, but also the departure by retirement of Thom from the company—something of value which it will not share with Allen. Varistar really received, therefore, two items of consideration.” (Emphasis added).

The problem with Allen’s extra-consideration argument is factual rather than conceptual. Varistar’s counsel acknowledged at oral argument on appeal that if the sale ostensibly for $1.7 million additionally discharged some obligation that Varistar owed to Thom or his co-investors, Allen might have a viable claim. For example, if Varistar sold the RedHawks to Thom for his agreement to discharge $1 million owed to him by Varistar or as a substitute for a $1 million severance package that Varistar otherwise would have provided to him directly, then the sale price would actually have been $2.7 million ($1.7 million cash plus $1 million as a discharge of an obligation). Varistar’s counsel acknowledged that a cash-plus-debt-forgiveness purchase such as this could support the claim that Varistar had breached the express terms of the settlement agreement. But despite Varistar’s concession, Allen’s argument lacks a basis in the complaint.

Allen included no allegation of a cash-and-noncash purchase in his complaint.

Equally fatal to recovery on this theory are Allen’s failure to allege that this sort of noncash

consideration occurred in the sale and his very specific complaint allegation to the contrary:

“In or about February 2004,... Varistar sold the RedHawks to Thom... at the unreasonably low price of $1.7 million.... The buyers also assumed the obligation to pay a $50,000 note receivable.” We therefore need not address the possibility that Allen might be able to produce evidence that the sale of the RedHawks to Thom involved an exchange of value beyond the $1.7 million and the $50,000 debt assumption. See Bodah, 663 N.W.2d at 553 (“The reviewing court must consider only the facts alleged in the complaint.”); see also Noske v. Friedberg, 670 N.W.2d 740, 742 (Minn. 2003) (requiring that a complaint “allege sufficient facts to state a claim”); In re Hennepin County 1986 Recycling Bond Litig., 540 N.W.2d at 497 (“[T]he court may not consider extrinsic evidence on a motion to dismiss pursuant to Minn. R. Civ. P. 12.02(e).”). Having failed to allege that any noncash consideration added to the actual sale price of the team, Allen’s argument that the district court erred by overlooking that theory fails to persuade us that the district court erred by dismissing the complaint.

–  –  –

Allen next argues that the district court dismissed his complaint erroneously because the court failed to consider the related concepts of frustration of a condition precedent and the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The argument has general appeal, but it ultimately fails to persuade us. Under Minnesota law, every contract includes an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. In re Hennepin County 1986 Recycling Bond Litig., 540 N.W.2d at 502. This covenant forbids a party to unjustifiably prevent its performance of the contract. Id. “[C]ourts employ the good faith performance doctrine to effectuate the intentions of parties, or to protect their reasonable expectations.” Steven J. Burton, Breach of Contract and the Common Law Duty to Perform in Good Faith, 94 Harv. L. Rev. 369, 371 (1980). The implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing applies when one party exercises discretion, thereby controlling the other party’s benefit. Id. at 369. Similarly, a party who caused nonperformance of a condition precedent may not raise nonperformance of the condition as a defense to a claim of breach of contract. Olson v. Penkert, 252 Minn.

334, 343, 90 N.W.2d 193, 200 (1958).

Allen contends that Varistar engaged in presumptively fraudulent self-dealing and breached the implied covenant of good faith because it allegedly frustrated a sale of the RedHawks at a price above $2.5 million. See Space Ctr., Inc. v. 451 Corp., 298 N.W.2d 443, 449 (Minn. 1980) (“[A] party to a contract cannot avoid its duties under the contract by preventing the performance of the other party or by disabling itself from performance.”).

Allen supports his argument that dismissal was error by noting that the sale was to a corporate insider and therefore ought to be viewed with suspicion; that the RedHawks were sold for a significantly lower price than Varistar’s previous valuation of the team; and that the limited record at this early stage of the litigation might be bolstered later by discovery to develop facts favorable to Allen’s contract claim.

Allen is correct that courts view insider transactions with suspicion. See Snyder Elec.

Pages:   || 2 |

Similar works:

«DIOCESE OF PENNSYLVANIA Journal of the The 230th Convention A “Green” document. This document is being distributed digitally in PDF format in conjunction with the conservation efforts suggested by the National Church. November 9, 2013 Table of Contents Diocese of Pennsylvania Officers, Deans, Bishop’s Staff Gen. Convention, Provincial Synod Deputies and Standing Committee Diocesan Council Diocesan Review Committee Diocesan Disciplinary Board Finance Committee Program Budget Committee...»

«Tracy Betsock, Press Relations PRESS RELEASE 202.274.5782 or filmfestdc@filmfestdc.org For October 7, 2016 THE WASHINGTON, DC INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL presents ARABIAN SIGHTS 2016 CONTEMPORARY ARAB CINEMA, WORLD PREMIERES AND EXCITING GUESTS October 21 – 30 WASHINGTON, DCThe 21ST Annual Arabian Sights Film Festival kicks off Friday, October 21 to present 17 new and exciting films from today’s Arab world. Running through Sunday, October 30th, the Festival features captivating films from...»

«Forthcoming in World Bank Research Observer East Asian Corporations, Before and During the Recent Financial Crisis1 by Stijn Claessens, Simeon Djankov and Lixin Colin Xu World Bank Abstract The performance of East Asian corporations, often considered stellar before the 1997 financial crisis, sharply deteriorated following the crisis. This decline has sparked an intense debate. Some have argued that external shocks, including falls in aggregate demand, and shortage of working capital, have...»

«21-NOV-2006 03-MAY-2007 Notification Change in Registrant Page 1 of 4 GROUP 3 INSECTICIDE PRELUDE 240® Synthetic Pyrethroid Insecticide COMMERCIAL GUARANTEE: Permethrin READ THE LABEL AND ATTACHED BOOKLET BEFORE USING KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN CAUTION POISON WARNING: SKIN IRRITANT CAUTION: EYE IRRITANT Store above 0°C REGISTRATION NO. 26509 PEST CONTROL PRODUCTS ACT NET CONTENTS: 1L, 5 L,10 L, 55 L,115 L, 450 L, 1000 L, Bulk Syngenta Crop Protection Canada, Inc. 140 Research Lane,...»

«Research Report – Update Investors should consider this report as only a single factor in making their investment decision. Aspen Group, Inc. Rating: Speculative Buy Howard Halpern ASPU $0.28 — (OTC QB) January 6, 2017 FY2014 A FY2015 A 2016 A 2017 E 2018 E Fiscal year net sales (in millions) $4.0 $5.2 $8.5 $12.9 $18.0 Earnings per share ($0.09) ($0.04) ($0.02) ($0.00) $0.01 52-Week range $0.37 – $0.10 Fiscal year ends: April Shares outstanding a/o 12/12/16 138 million Revenue/shares...»

«Culture Unbound: Journal of Current Cultural Research Thematic Section: Exhibiting Europe  Edited by Stefan Krankenhagen Extraction from Volume 3, 2011 Linköping University Electronic Press ISSN 2000-1525 (www) URL: http://www.cultureunbound.ep.liu.se/ Copyright Culture Unbound: Journal of Current Cultural Research is published under the auspices of Linköping University Electronic Press. All Authors retain the copyright of their articles. The publishers will keep this document online on the...»

«Adobe Premiere Pro CS6 Workflow Guide Using Adobe® Premiere® Pro CS6 with file-based JVC ProHD content Adobe Premiere Pro CS6 software provides native support for JVC ProHD cameras and content with no transcoding, smooth importing, and strong metadata support, real-time editing, and flexible delivery options. This document describes the workflow benefits of using Adobe Premiere Pro with JVC Pro HD content. Speed your production workflow with native file-based support The latest generation of...»

«Head Boy and Head Girl With the start of a new academic year, I want to take the opportunity to introduce you to our Head Boy and Head Girl and their deputies. The Head Boy for the academic year 2015/16 is Lewis Smith 11H and the Head Girl is Aniza Siddaqua 11G. They are ably supported by their deputies Sarah Singleton 11E and Ore Olayinka 11E. Lewis and Aniza have only been in their role for a week and they have already appeared on ITN news and spoken in front of several hundred people at our...»

«1 Follow Me Ministries 21. Yeshua Visits Abraham http://follow-me-ministries.org/archives/2309 21. Yeshua Visits Abraham Many religious people accept the Tanach (Old Testament) as God s written Word, but they reject the apostolic writings (New Testament) that proclaim Yeshua (Jesus) of Nazareth as being God incarnate and Messiah of Israel. Their preconceived ideas concerning monotheism and God s totally transcendent nature force them to view the notion that God could appear to men in human...»

«The Price of Wine Elroy Dimson, Peter L. Rousseau, and Christophe Spaenjers* This version: 22 January 2014 Abstract: Using long-term price records for Premiers Crus Bordeaux, we examine the impact of aging on wine prices and the long-term investment performance of fine wine. As well as time effects, our model identifies the impacts of age, château, vintage, and transaction type. Young high-quality wines, that are still maturing, provide the highest financial return, while famous wines deliver...»

«19 November 2015 Investment Funds | United Kingdom Investment Funds Idea – Utilico Emerging Markets* Today’s fund in the spotlight: We continue to remain cautious on emerging markets. Within emerging markets we recommend that investors buy Utilico Emerging Markets* (UEM), Utilico Emerging Markets* (UEM) trading at a 9.8% discount (cum, fair, undiluted). UEM has just announced that it has increased its quarterly dividend payments to 1.625p, for the quarter UEM NAV TR vs. MSCI EM Index ending...»

«Bankacılar Dergisi, Sayı 56, 2005 Ülkemizde Finansal Analizin Başlangıcı Prof. Dr. Cevat Sarıkamış* Ülkemizde iş hayatında finansal analizin ilk uygulandığı kurum 1950 yılında kurulan Türkiye Sınai Kalkınma Bankası’dır. Orta veya uzun süreli yatırım kredisi kullanmak isteyen sınai kuruluşlarının bu gereksinmelerini karşılamak görevini üstlenen Banka, kredinin taşıyacağı riski ölçmek durumunda idi. Bunun için de firmanın geçmiş dönemlere ait finansal...»

<<  HOME   |    CONTACTS
2017 www.thesis.dislib.info - Online materials, documents

Materials of this site are available for review, all rights belong to their respective owners.
If you do not agree with the fact that your material is placed on this site, please, email us, we will within 1-2 business days delete him.