Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Kane v. Kane

3 Citing cases

  1. Kane v. Kane

    706 P.2d 676 (Wyo. 1985)   Cited 14 times
    In Kane v. Kane, Wyo., 706 P.2d 676, 679 (1985), we held that we need not address issues regarding the propriety of a judgment premised on Wyoming's version of the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act where there was in the record another proper basis for upholding the judgment of the trial court.

    This case has been before this court on two previous occasions. Kane v. Kane, Wyo., 577 P.2d 172 (1978); Kane v. Kane, Wyo., 616 P.2d 780 (1980). It appears that the reason for this appeal is the assertion of inconsistent positions by the Internal Revenue Service of the Department of Treasury of the United States of America with respect to payment of taxes arising out of the sale of the ranch property in Montana to Shell Oil Company. If the effect of the divorce decree was that at that time a sale occurred from Kenneth A. Kane to Donna J. Kane of an undivided one-half interest in the ranch property in exchange for a release of her marital rights then the transaction would result in all of the taxes being paid by Kenneth Kane. On the other hand, if the decree of divorce effected a division of property between co-owners then upon the sale each of the parties would pay one-half of the taxes. When this issue arose Kenneth A. Kane filed a motion in the divorce case seeking modification of the decree pursuant to Rule 60(a), W.R.C.P. Apparently out of an abundance of caution he also filed a separate declaratory judgment action in wh

  2. Eddy v. First Wyoming Bank, N.A.-LANDER

    713 P.2d 228 (Wyo. 1986)   Cited 19 times
    In Eddy, a mistake "was made by counsel in drafting the judgment so that appellants were liable on the judgment from both January 28, 1982, and from May 23, 1983."

    We have also said that the distinction does not depend so much upon the person making the error as upon whether it was the deliberate result of reasoning and determination. Holmes v. Holmes, supra. In Kane v. Kane, Wyo., 616 P.2d 780 (1980), this court held that a clerical error occurred when counsel for the successful party prepared a judgment which failed to include a complete description of the property which was to be awarded his client. In the case at bar, counsel for the bank prepared a judgment which fails to unambiguously state the date from which the bank would have judgment.

  3. Mullinax and Mullinax

    292 Or. 416 (Or. 1982)   Cited 31 times
    Holding that, where an amended judgment supplants an original judgment, an appeal must be taken from the amended judgment

    * * *" (Emphasis added.) For examples of "clerical errors" made by counsel, see Kane v. Kane, 616 P.2d 780 (Wyo 1980), in which counsel, while preparing a proposed decree as requested by the trial court, failed to include within the legal description all the land covered by the decree, and in Mulder v. Mendo Wood Products, Inc., 225 Cal.App.2d 619, 37 Cal.Rptr. 479 (1964), cert denied 379 U.S. 844, 85 S Ct 85, 13 LEd 2d 50 (1964), in which an amended judgment was entered to eliminate an award of interest which had been inadvertently inserted in the original judgment, the draft of which had been prepared by counsel. The purpose of an amendment correcting a "clerical error" is "* * * to make the record speak the truth and conform it to what actually occurred."