Detmers v. Costner
2012 SD 35, 814 N.W.2d 146, 2012 S.D. 35 (2012)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A party's agreement to a condition within a contract can be established by their conduct and actions. When interpreting an unambiguous contract, courts will give terms their plain and ordinary meaning and will not add language that the parties themselves did not include.
Facts:
- In the early 1990s, Kevin Costner commissioned artist Peggy Detmers to create 17 large bronze sculptures for a luxury resort he planned to build, called 'The Dunbar'.
- When The Dunbar was not built by the late 1990s, Detmers stopped working on the sculptures.
- On May 5, 2000, Costner and Detmers signed a new agreement which stated that if The Dunbar was not built within ten years or the sculptures were not 'agreeably displayed elsewhere,' Costner must sell them and split the profits with Detmers.
- Because The Dunbar was not under construction within three years, the parties began looking for alternative display locations as required by the agreement.
- In 2002, Costner proposed placing the sculptures at a new attraction on his property called 'Tatanka,' located on the site where The Dunbar was to be built.
- Detmers was influential in the design and placement of the sculptures at Tatanka, suggesting the use of wood mock-ups to determine their exact locations.
- Detmers was present when the sculptures were installed at Tatanka and spoke with enthusiasm and pride at its grand opening in June 2003.
Procedural Posture:
- In 2008, Peggy Detmers sued Kevin Costner in a South Dakota circuit court (the trial court), seeking a declaratory judgment.
- Prior to trial, the court ruled that the contract was unambiguous and denied Costner's motion to introduce parol evidence.
- Following a bench trial focused on whether the sculptures were 'agreeably displayed elsewhere,' the trial court entered judgment in favor of Costner.
- Detmers, as the appellant, appealed the trial court's judgment to the Supreme Court of South Dakota, with Costner as the appellee.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does an artist's active and enthusiastic participation in placing commissioned sculptures at a new attraction satisfy an 'agreeably displayed elsewhere' clause in a contract, even if the new attraction is on the same land intended for a previously planned but unbuilt resort?
Opinions:
Majority - Gilbertson, Chief Justice
Yes, an artist's active participation satisfies an 'agreeably displayed elsewhere' clause because such conduct demonstrates agreement, and the term 'elsewhere' is interpreted by its plain meaning. The trial court's factual finding that Detmers agreed to the placement at Tatanka was not clearly erroneous, as it was supported by her extensive involvement in the design, placement, and grand opening of the attraction. Her subsequent claim that she only agreed based on a guarantee The Dunbar would be built was unsupported by the record. Legally, the court's interpretation of 'elsewhere' was correct; the contract's reference point is the built 'Dunbar' resort, not the land itself. Since The Dunbar was never built, Tatanka qualifies as a location 'elsewhere.' To interpret the contract otherwise would require rewriting it to add the word 'site,' which the court will not do.
Analysis:
This case serves as a classic illustration of two fundamental contract law principles: agreement by conduct and the plain meaning rule. The court's decision reinforces that a party's actions can be more compelling evidence of their intent than their later testimony, particularly when those actions are inconsistent with their subsequent claims. The ruling also underscores the judiciary's reluctance to look beyond the four corners of an unambiguous contract or to insert terms that the parties did not negotiate. For future cases, this decision solidifies that a party cannot escape a contractual condition they appeared to accept through their behavior, and that plain language will be strictly enforced as written.
