Turner v. Steele

1
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

No. 115,257

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS

DAN E. TURNER and PHILLIP L. TURNER, d/b/a TURNER & TURNER,
Appellants,

v.

LARRY STEELE, et al., Defendants, (FIRST TRIBUNE INSURANCE AGENCY, INC., and
WESTERN PLAINS FUNDS, INC.; SCOTT SCHNEIDER; JAMES MYERS; and PAUL MYERS),
Appellees.


MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appeal from Shawnee District Court; REBECCA W. CROTTY, judge. Opinion filed April 21, 2017.
Affirmed.

Phillip L. Turner, of Turner & Turner, of Topeka, for appellants.

Nathanael W. Berg, of Hampton & Royce, L.C., of Salina, for appellees First Tribune Insurance
Agency, Inc., and Western Plains Funds, Inc.

Charles F. Moser, of Moser Law Office, P.A., of Tribune, for appellees Scott Schneider, James
Myers, and Paul Myers.

Before ATCHESON, P.J., STANDRIDGE and SCHROEDER, JJ.

Per Curiam: Although the parties are more than familiar with the matter before
us, we summarize the factual and procedural history as a brief introduction. This case
involves a dispute over funds used to purchase and redeem real property located in
Greeley County after a sheriff's sale of the property was vacated. The property at issue
was sold to Scott Schneider, James Myers, and Paul Myers (Purchasers) at a sheriff's sale
2
as a result of an attempt by the law firm of Turner & Turner and its principals, Dan E.
Turner and Phillip L. Turner (Plaintiffs), to enforce a judgment against their former
clients, the Steeles (Defendants). First Tribune Insurance Agency, Inc., and Western
Plains Funds, Inc. (Landowners), alleged that they had previously purchased the property
at a mortgage foreclosure sale and attempted to redeem the property by depositing funds
with the district court clerk. The parties engaged in extensive litigation regarding
ownership of the property, which eventually reached this court on two separate occasions.
In the first case, we vacated the district court's confirmation of the sheriff's sale. Turner v.
Steele, 47 Kan. App. 2d 976, 282 P.3d 632 (2012). In the second case, we affirmed the
district court's ruling quieting title to the property in favor of the Landowners. First
Tribune Ins. Agency, Inc. v. Turner, No. 108,188, 2014 WL 2401398 (Kan. App. 2014)
(unpublished opinion). Based on these rulings, the Landowners filed a motion for return
of the funds deposited in their attempt to redeem the property, and the Purchasers filed a
motion for return of the funds they had used to buy the property.

In a comprehensive and well-reasoned memorandum decision, the district court
vacated the sheriff's sale of the property at issue, granted the Landowners' motion for
return of the redemption proceeds, and granted the Purchasers' motion for return of the
sheriff's sale proceeds. Specifically, the court determined that the Landowners were
entitled to the redemption proceeds because there could be no redemption without a valid
sale. The court held that the clerk lacked the authority to retain the funds deposited on
May 19, 2011, and ordered that they be returned to the individual/entity listed on the
original checks, with accrued interest. The district court further concluded that, as a
matter of equity, the Purchasers were entitled to return of the proceeds from the sheriff's
sale. The court held that because the Purchasers' claim was not a new cause of action, the
Plaintiffs' affirmative defenses did not apply to bar the Purchasers' motion. The district
court later denied the Plaintiffs' motion to alter or amend.

3
Plaintiffs appeal the district court's decision to grant both motions. We have
thoroughly examined the record on appeal and the district court's consideration of each
issue presented for decision. We find no error with respect to the district court's analysis
on each of these issues. For this reason, we affirm the district court's decision under
Supreme Court Rule 7.042(b)(5) (2017 Kan. S. Ct. R. 48).

Affirmed.