Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

BHP Petroleum Co., Inc. v. Okie

Wyoming Supreme Court

Decided August 28, 1992No. 91-14Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partCardine, Justice

I agree that the trial court should not have granted partial recision in this case, since Mrs. Okie’s proper remedy was damages. Unlike the majority, however, I would remand to the trial court for a determination of the damages to be awarded her.

I. Procedural Concerns

I part company with the majority in its implication that Mrs. Okie’s “waiver” of *885damages below leaves her without a remedy. The majority takes the position that Mrs. Okie waived damages and is stuck with that waiver. However, the record shows that Mrs. Okie’s waiver was an election of a remedy as distinguished from a real…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Allen v. AllenWyoming Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Robert W. Anderson House-Wrecking & Excavating, Inc. v. Board of TrusteesWyoming Supreme Court · 1984
  3. A. L. Massey v. Gulf Oil CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1975
  4. Coronado Oil Co. v. GrievesWyoming Supreme Court · 1979
  5. Nab v. HillsIdaho Supreme Court · 1969

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API