Mun S. Seifert v. Eskimos, Inc.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MUN S. SEIFERT,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ESKIMOS, INC.,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 14-35777
D.C. No. 3:13-cv-00080-TMB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Alaska
Timothy M. Burgess, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted August 13, 2015
Anchorage, Alaska
Before: SCHROEDER, RAWLINSON, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Appellant Mun S. Seifert (Seifert) appeals the district court’s order granting
defendant-Appellee Eskimos, Inc.’s motion to dismiss. Seifert contends that the
district court erred in finding that Seifert had not pled facts giving rise to an
enforceable lease.
FILED
SEP 18 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

-- 1 of 2 --

The unambiguous language of the lease and the Alaska Statute of Frauds
required any extension over one year to be in writing. See Alaska Stat. §
09.25.010(a)(6), (b) (requiring leases that exceed one year to be committed to
writing). No legal or equitable exception negated that requirement in this case. Cf.
Alaska Stat. § 09.25.020 (providing that full performance by one party accepted by
the other according to the terms of the contract is a statutory exception to the
Statute of Frauds); Mitchell v. Land, 355 P.2d 682, 686 (Alaska 1960) (recognizing
part performance as an exception to the Statute of Frauds).
Even if the prior owner equitably waived its contractual right to demand a
signed writing, Seifert cited no authority suggesting that the prior owner’s waiver
binds successors in interest. In addition, Seifert made no persuasive argument that
a verbal promise to extend a contractual lease should be construed to run with the
land. See Restatement (Second) of Prop.: Landlord & Tenant § 16.1 (suggesting
that only an express promise in a lease runs with the land).
AFFIRMED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --