By: Derek Hawkins//October 11, 2017//
WI Court of Appeals – District III
Case Name: Helmer E. Hanson Living Trust (Randi L. Osberg, Trustee) v. Steven D. Hanson, et al.
Case No.: 2016AP1448
Officials: Stark, P.J., Hruz and Seidl, JJ.
Focus: Doctrines of Claim Preclusion, Issue Preclusion, and Laches
Steven Hanson, pro se, appeals from a judgment foreclosing a mortgage on property owned by Hanson Management, Inc. On appeal, Hanson raises a number of arguments directed at challenging the validity of the underlying mortgage. We conclude these arguments constitute an improper attempt to collaterally attack the mortgage, and we therefore decline to consider them. We reject on the merits Hanson’s argument that he is entitled to a homestead exemption with respect to approximately twenty acres of the mortgaged property. We therefore affirm in part.
Hanson also argues on appeal that the circuit court erred by concluding his counterclaims against the mortgagee, the Helmer E. Hanson Living Trust (“the Trust”), and his third-party claims against the trustee, individually, were barred by the doctrines of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, and laches. We agree with Hanson that the circuit court erred by concluding claim preclusion and issue preclusion barred his counterclaims and third-party claims regarding the Trust’s rejection of certain offers to purchase a portion of the mortgaged property. We further conclude the record is insufficient for us to determine, as a matter of law, whether the doctrine of laches bars those claims. We therefore reverse the circuit court’s dismissal of Hanson’s counterclaims and third-party claims regarding the Trust’s rejection of the offers to purchase. We remand for the circuit court to determine if the doctrine of laches bars those claims, and, if not, for further proceedings on those claims.