Paula Goff v. Elizabeth Ewers ( 2023 )


Menu:
  •            RENDERED: JANUARY 27, 2023; 10:00 A.M.
    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
    Commonwealth of Kentucky
    Court of Appeals
    NO. 2020-CA-1608-MR
    PAULA GOFF; BETTY MCCOWN;
    JIM MOORE; JOHN M. LAWRENCE
    REVOCABLE TRUST; AND
    LEANNA GLADDEN                                      APPELLANTS
    APPEAL FROM PIKE CIRCUIT COURT
    v.          HONORABLE THOMAS M. SMITH, JUDGE
    ACTION NO. 14-CI-01381
    ELIZABETH ANN ROWE EWERS;
    BETTY M. HAMILTON FAMILY
    TRUST; BILLY PAUL ROWE; CHRIS
    JOHNSON; COUNTY OF PIKE; JUDY
    ROWE KEEN; KENNETH D.
    MOORE; KENTUCKY
    DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE;
    MARK RUSTIN ROWE; MISTY
    ROWE POTTER; PILGRIM ENERGY,
    LLC; STEWART O. LECROY; AND
    TAXCO, LLC                                           APPELLEES
    OPINION AND ORDER
    DISMISSING
    * * * * * *
    BEFORE: GOODWINE, KAREM, AND TAYLOR, JUDGES.
    TAYLOR, JUDGE: Paula Goff, Betty McCowan, Jim Moore, John M. Lawrence
    Revocable Trust, and Leanna Gladden (collectively referred to as appellants) bring
    this appeal from an October 27, 2020, order of the Pike Circuit Court granting
    Chris Johnson’s Kentucky Rules of Civil Rules (CR) 60.02 motion to set aside an
    order entered October 2, 2019, confirming a foreclosure sale of real property by the
    master commissioner. For the reasons stated, we dismiss this appeal as being taken
    from an interlocutory order.
    This action has a complex procedural history, so we will only recite
    those facts necessary to resolve this appeal. Appellants and appellees are owners
    of an undivided oil and gas estate in some 400 acres of real property (oil and gas
    estate) and/or are third-party purchasers of certificates of delinquency for unpaid
    ad valorem taxes assessed against the oil and gas estate.
    Appalachian Investments, LLC, had purchased three certificates of
    delinquency and filed a foreclosure action to enforce its liens upon the oil and gas
    estate on December 30, 2014. Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 134.490. In its
    amended complaint, Appalachian named Chris Johnson as a defendant, who had
    also purchased a certificate of delinquency for unpaid ad valorem taxes assessed
    upon the oil and gas estate. Johnson filed an answer and cross-claim. In the cross-
    -2-
    claim, Johnson stated that he possessed a certificate of delinquency and also sought
    to enforce his lien upon the oil and gas estate.1
    Sometime in 2019, appellants purchased the lien claims held by
    Appalachian. On April 24, 2019, appellants filed a Motion for Realignment of
    Parties and to Reassign for Court Sale. Therein, appellants stated that they had
    obtained an assignment of the liens held by Appalachian by purchasing same. As a
    consequence, appellants sought to be reclassified as plaintiffs in place of
    Appalachian. Appellants failed to serve Johnson or his attorney a copy of this
    motion.
    By order entered June 3, 2019, the circuit court granted appellants’
    motion and also ordered the oil and gas estate to be sold again by the master
    commissioner. The order was prepared by appellants’ attorney and did not provide
    for service on Johnson or his attorney. Subsequently, on August 28, 2019, the
    master commissioner conducted the sale and filed a Report of Sale with the court
    on that date. Therein, the master commissioner reported that the oil and gas estate
    was sold for $17,000 to appellants. Appellants then filed a motion to confirm the
    1
    On April 12, 2017, an in rem judgment and order of sale of the oil and gas estate was rendered
    and a sale was conducted on May 31, 2017. Chris Johnson was duly noticed as a party in that
    order. The judgment and order of sale was appealed to the Court of Appeals, said appeal being
    dismissed by order entered December 15, 2017, for failure to name indispensable parties (No.
    2017-CA-0858-MR). By order entered November 19, 2018, the order confirming the May 31,
    2017, sale was set aside by the circuit court, and a new sale was ordered. The circuit court
    emphasized that adequate notice be given to all parties in accordance with applicable law.
    -3-
    sale and to order the master commissioner to deliver a deed conveying the oil and
    gas estate to appellants, without notice to Johnson or his attorney. Ultimately, by
    order entered October 2, 2019, the circuit court confirmed the sale and ordered the
    master commissioner to deliver a deed conveying the oil and gas estate to
    appellants. Again, neither Johnson nor his attorney were served a copy of the
    order.
    Some eleven months later, on September 9, 2020, Johnson, by
    counsel, filed a Motion to Set Aside Master Commissioner Sale and Deed and later
    filed an Amended Motion to Set Aside Master Commissioner Sale and Deed.
    Therein, Johnson claimed:
    2. Chris Johnson purchased a 2014 Tax Bill
    00073G in the name of Elizabeth Ewers and has been a
    party to this action since its inception and has filed
    pleadings, appeared at hearings and was actively
    involved prior to the appeal. At no time has Mr.
    Johnson’s lien been purchased or released. Nor has the
    undersigned withdrawn from this case and received
    pleadings and notices from opposing counsel including
    Mr. Webster and the Master Commissioner. However, it
    appears that Mr. Webster stopped including the
    undersigned counsel in late 2018 or early 2019 copies of
    his pleadings.
    3. According to Mr. Webster[,] Paula Goff, and
    others purchased the liens held by Appalachian
    Investments, LLC[,] sometime prior to April 24, 2019[,]
    in which Webster used as a basis to file a Motion For
    Realignment of Parties and to [reassign] for Court Sale.
    Mr. Webster FAILED to provide notice to the
    undersigned or his client Chris Johnson. Attached is a
    -4-
    copy of the Motion where Mr. Webster FAILED to
    notify the attorney of record James Hamilton and the
    Order prepared by Mr. Webster also omitted Mr.
    Hamilton from the certificate of service. . . .
    4. The Master Commissioner also failed to notify
    James Hamilton or Chris Johnson of the sale despite
    Court Orders and notice requirements under Kentucky
    law. However, the Master Commissioner did notify Mr.
    Hamilton as to the first Master Commissioner sale in
    2017. . . .
    5. Mr. Webster failed to include James Hamilton
    on his Motion to Confirm Sale and for Deed dated
    September 11, 2019. . . . Yet, Mr. Webster knew all
    along that James Hamilton represented Chris Johnson as
    he included Hamilton on his Objection and Exceptions to
    Sale and Report of Sale on June 6, 2017[,] and various
    other motions. . . . Also, see Mr. Webster’s Motion to
    Assign for Trial on issues of fact dated Feb. 21, 2017[,]
    in which James Hamilton was included on the service of
    process. . . .
    6. Once Mr. Webster had the parties names
    changed by Motion for Realignment unbeknownst to the
    undersigned, Mr. Webster and others failed to notify the
    undersigned of any court activity.
    Amended Motion to Set Aside Master Commissioner Sale and Deed at 1-2.
    Johnson specifically sought to set aside the sale under CR 60.02(a), (d), and (f).
    By order entered October 27, 2020, the circuit court granted the CR
    60.02 motion to set aside the master commissioner sale and deed “due to lack of
    notice of sale (to Johnson or his attorney) and irregularities of the previous sale.”
    October 27, 2020, Order at 1. The court further held Johnson’s lien claim was still
    -5-
    valid and appellants had the option to avoid another commissioner sale of the oil
    and gas estate “by satisfying Chris Johnson’s lien.” October 27, 2020, Order at 1.
    If the lien was not satisfied, the court order stated that the oil and gas estate would
    be resold by the master commissioner. In response, on November 25, 2020,
    appellants filed a Notice of Appeal in the Court of Appeals from the October 27,
    2020, order.
    In Kentucky, the general rule is that an order setting aside a judgment
    and reopening the action for further proceedings is interlocutory and not final and
    appealable. Hackney v. Hackney, 
    327 S.W.2d 570
    , 571 (Ky. 1959); Black Forest
    Coal, LLC v. GRC Dev., LLC, 
    483 S.W.3d 378
    , 380 (Ky. App. 2015); see also 7
    David V. Kramer, Kentucky Practice – Rules of Civil Procedure § 60.02 (2022).2
    We have thoroughly reviewed the extensive record in this case. The
    record establishes that on September 9, 2020, Johnson filed a motion under CR
    60.02(a), (d), and (f), to set aside the October 2, 2019, order confirming sale. The
    premise of the motion was that neither Johnson nor his attorney were properly
    2
    In Asset Acceptance, LLC v. Moberly, 
    241 S.W.3d 329
    , 332 (Ky. 2007), the Kentucky Supreme
    Court recognized the general rule that an order setting aside a judgment and reopening the case is
    nonfinal. However, the Supreme Court also set forth an exception to the general rule. Under this
    exception, the Supreme Court permitted an immediate appeal from such an order “where the
    disrupted judgment [was] more than one year old, and where the reason offered for setting it
    aside” was extraordinary circumstances per Kentucky Rules of Civil Procedure 60.02(f). Id. at
    334. Additionally, it must be noted that the judgment set aside was a default judgment and that
    appellant alleged that due to mental incapability she was unaware of the notice concerning the
    action. As to the case at hand, we believe this exception to be inapplicable.
    -6-
    notified of the sale that occurred on August 28, 2019. On October 27, 2020, the
    circuit court granted the CR 60.02 motion and set aside the sale. The record
    reflects that appellants failed to follow the directives set forth in that order and did
    not satisfy Johnson’s lien on the oil and gas estate; thus, per the October 27, 2020,
    order, the oil and gas estate was to be resold by the master commissioner. That
    sale apparently did not occur due to the filing of this appeal. Under these facts, as
    a matter of law, we must conclude that the October 27, 2020, order is interlocutory
    and nonappealable.
    Now, therefore, be it ORDERED that Appeal No. 2020-CA-1608-MR
    is hereby DISMISSED as having been taken from a nonfinal interlocutory order.
    ALL CONCUR.
    ENTERED: _________________                      ___________________________
    JUDGE, COURT OF APPEALS
    BRIEF FOR APPELLANTS:                             BRIEF FOR APPELLEES:
    Lawrence R. Webster                               James L. Hamilton
    Pikeville, Kentucky                               Pikeville, Kentucky
    -7-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2020 CA 001608

Filed Date: 1/26/2023

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/3/2023