Ray W. Stoddard and Thelma Stoddard v. Frank Stoddard

Frank Stoddard appeals from a summary judgment in favor of Ray and Thelma Stoddard in an action for collection on a note. We affirm the judgment.

I. Facts

Appellees Ray and Thelma Stoddard are husband and wife. Ray Stoddard (Ray) and appellant Frank Stoddard (Frank) are brothers. This suit is based on a note signed by Frank on April 15, 1975. It was signed to consummate a settlement between the brothers resolving a dispute which had arisen out of an alleged land exchange contract made in 1969.

In early 1969, Frank became interested in purchasing a cattle ranch in Oklahoma. Frank wanted Ray to sell Ray’s ranch in Idaho and lend the proceeds to Frank to enable him to buy the new ranch. Frank contends that Ray agreed to sell the ranch and lend the proceeds to him at 8% interest. Ray denies the existence of such an agreement. Frank contends that in reliance on this alleged oral loan agreement he went ahead and purchased the Oklahoma ranch.

In July 1969, Ray determined on advice of his accountant that a tax-free exchange of ranch property would be the best way to provide Frank with the needed funds for the Oklahoma venture without creating any tax liability for Ray. The contract…

dissenting and concurring:

I respectfully disagree with my colleagues and the district court in finding and concluding that the circumstances surrounding the 1969 agreement were such as to permit summary judgment on the usury issues. In my view, there were genuine and material issues of fact, all of which are bound up with issues of credibility and the weight to be accorded the sharply conflicting evidence presented by the parties. However, in my view, it is not necessary to elaborate on those issues and I would not reach them.

The compromise and settlement culminating in the execution and delivery of the 1975 promissory note, under applicable Idaho case law, wiped the slate clean as between the parties. Summary judgment on this issue was proper. Frank's argument that the settlement note of 1975 is still tainted with usury is simply untenable. I concur in the conclusion reached in Part Y of Judge Choy’s opinion on the binding and enforceable effect of the compromise and settlement agreement, on the duress defense, and the conclusion to affirm the district court.

641 F.2d 812 Ray W. STODDARD and Thelma Stoddard, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Frank STODDARD, Defendant-Appellant. No. 79-4177. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Dec. 9, 1980. Decided April 9, 1981. William L. McGimsey, Las Vegas, Nev., for defendant-appellant. Lowell N. Hawkes, Pocatello, Idaho, for plaintiffs-appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Idaho. Before CHOY, J. BLAINE ANDERSON and SCHROEDER, Circuit Judges. CHOY, Circuit Judge: 1 Frank Stoddard appeals from a summary judgment in favor of Ray and Thelma Stoddard in an action for collection on a note. We affirm the judgment. I. Facts 2 Appellees Ray and Thelma Stoddard are husband and wife. Ray Stoddard (Ray) and appellant Frank Stoddard (Frank) are brothers. This suit is based on a note signed by Frank on April 15, 1975. It was signed to consummate a settlement between the brothers resolving a dispute which had arisen out of an alleged land exchange contract made in 1969. 3 In early 1969, Frank became interested in purchasing a cattle ranch in Oklahoma. Frank wanted Ray to sell Ray's ranch in Idaho and lend the proceeds to Frank to enable him to buy the…