Preview:

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 7-625 / 07-0318 Filed November 29, 2007 GENE AKERS, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. OAK HILL PLANTATION, L.C., and RICHARD L. WALTERS, Defendants-Appellants. ________________________________________________________________ OAK HILL PLANTATION, L.C., and RICHARD L. WALTERS, Counterclaim Plaintiffs-Appellants, vs. GENE AKERS, Counterclaim Defendant-Appellee. ________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Dallas County, Gregory A. Hulse, Judge.

Oak Hill Plantation, L.C. appeals from the district court order entering judgment in favor of Gene Akers on his breach of contract claim. AFFIRMED.

Randy Hefner and Matthew J. Hemphill of Hemphill & Bergkamp, P.C., Adel, for appellants. A. Zane Blessum, Winterset, and Catherine K. Levine, Des Moines, for appellee. Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Zimmer and Eisenhauer, JJ.

2

EISENHAUER, J. The defendant, Oak Hill Plantation, L.C. (Oak Hill), appeals from the district court order entering judgment in favor of the plaintiff, Gene Akers, on his breach of contract claim. Oak Hill contends the court erred because the statute of frauds invalidated the contract. Our review is for correction of errors at law. Kolkman v. Roth, 656 N.W.2d 148, 151 (Iowa 2003) ("We review a decision by the district court to admit oral evidence of a contract under an exception to the statute of frauds for corrections of errors at law."). Akers entered into an oral contract with Oak Hill to raise hay on some property owned by Oak Hill until the land could be developed. Akers was to provide the machinery, fuel, and labor and the parties would split ownership of the resulting crop in half. These facts are undisputed. The parties, however, disagree as to the length of the contract and how the hay was to be sold. Akers claims the contract was for four to seven years. Oak Hill argues the contract was for one year with an option to renew. It also claims Akers was to buy its half of the hay or sell it and give the proceeds to Oak Hill. In 2004, Akers mowed and baled the hay on Oak Hill's property. He

attempted to sell Oak Hill's half but was unable to and left half the bales of hay on the property. The following year, Akers was informed Oak Hill had decided to rent the land to someone else. Akers filed a small claim against Oak Hill in October 2005, alleging breach of contract and wrongful termination of a farm lease. 1 The case was removed to district court.

1

The wrongful termination of farm lease claim was dismissed by Akers at trial.

3

Following trial in November 2006, the district court entered judgment in favor of Akers on his breach of contract claim and awarded him $8400 plus interest. Oak Hill filed a motion to reconsider, which the court denied. On

appeal, Oak Hill contends Akers's breach of contract claim must fail because the contract violates the statute of frauds. "The statute of frauds, which is no more than a rule of evidence, governs, not the validity of a contract, but only the manner in which one may be proven." Garland v. Brandstad, 648 N.W.2d 65, 71 (Iowa 2002). It does not render oral promises invalid. Harriott v. Tronvold, 671 N.W.2d 417, 422 (Iowa 2003). Iowa Code section 622.32(4) (2005) bars evidence of oral contracts that are not to be performed within a year. However, enforcement of such contracts is not barred where the existence of the contract is not denied in the pleadings. Iowa Code

Download GENE AKERS, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. OAK HILL PLANTATION, L.C., and RICHARD L. WA

Iowa Law