Triton Coal Co. v. Husman, Inc.
Wyoming Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
MACY, Chief Justice.
Triton Coal Company appeals from a special verdict granting breach-of-contract damages to Husman, Inc., in part, because Triton failed to fully pay Husman for its removal of overburden and topsoil from Triton’s coal mine.
We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.
Triton raises the following issues on appeal:. 1. Did the District Court exceed its jurisdiction by submitting breach of contract claims to the jury which were not appealed by Husman and therefore beyond the scope of the issues identified in this Court’s Order on Remand following the first appeal?
2. Did the…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- American Enterprise, Inc. v. Van WinkleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- Tom Beuchler Construction, Inc. v. City of WillistonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1987
- Attorney General of Utah v. PomeroyUtah Supreme Court · 1937
- Culbertson v. CizekCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
- Cody v. AtkinsWyoming Supreme Court · 1983
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Brown v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 1998
- Lieberman v. MossbrookWyoming Supreme Court · 2009
- Beaulieu v. FlorquistWyoming Supreme Court · 2004
- Gainsco Insurance Co. v. Amoco Production Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 2002
- Rino v. MeadWyoming Supreme Court · 2002
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.