No. 90-079 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

1990 

STEVE KOONTZ, 

Plaintiff and Respondent, 

-vsSKY COUNTRY, INC. , Defendant and Appellant. 

APPEAL FROM: District Court of the Eighteenth Judicial District, 

In and for the County of Gallatin, 

The Honorable Thomas A. Olson, Judge presiding. 

COUNSEL OF RECORD: 

For Appellant: 

John P. Atkins, Bryan & Atkins, Bozeman, Montana 

For Respondent: 

Karl Knuchel, Livingston, Montana 

Submitted: July 15, 1990 

Decided: ~ugust 17, 1990 

CLERK OF SUPRTbIE COURT 

STATE OF i'fl3NTANA Clerk 
Justice John C. Sheehy delivered the Opinion of the Court. 

Sky Country, Inc. appeals from a judgment entered in the 

District Court, Eighteenth Judicial District, Gallatin County, 

awarding Steve Koontz $3,768.66 in damages. We reverse the 

District Court. 

The sole issue in this case is whether Koontz was entitled to 

$3,768.66 in ''invalid trailer charges.'' 

Sky Country is an interstate motor carrier based in Bozeman, 

Montana. The company engages the services of owner\operators who 

lease their tractor-trailer units to Sky Country to haul freight 

throughout the lower 48 states. Sky Country and Steve Koontz 

entered into such a lease agreement in November of 1985. Koontz 

leased to Sky Country his Mack tractor. Sky Country provided the 

trailer. Koontz, under the contract, was to pay for all repairs, 

driver's wages, fuel, insurance and vehicle maintenance. Koontz 

was to receive 75.43 percent of all profits in the venture. After 

each trip, Sky Country provided Koontz with settlement statements 

detailing gross revenues plus costs and expenses. 

The parties terminated their relationship in November of 1986. 

Koontz brought suit in February, 1988, claiming money for unpaid 

fuel credits, trailer repairs, fines, over advance charges and for 

a trip which Koontz allegedly had not been paid. No claim for 

freight adjustment was ever made by Koontz. 

Freight adjustments, in the words of Koontz, are made 

"whenever a load is short or damaged or late or something . . .I1 
In more practical terms, freight adjustments come about in this 

manner: The driver of the tractor-trailer is paid according to the 

goods he delivers. If the customer is dissatisfied with the amount 

or quality of the goods, he withholds a portion of the payment. 

As Sky Country has already made its estimate of the load's worth, 

it must adjust its figures. This adjusted amount is then reflected 

on the settlement statement provided to Koontz. The procedure is 

set forth in the parties1 contract as follows: 

In the event damage or shortage is noted on a delivery 

receipt, Contractor [Koontz] assumes complete 

responsibility and liability for the contents of the 

load. Damages and shortages are to be charged back to 

the Contractor. Settlements may be withheld on the 

involved trip until the claim has been settled in full 

with the shipper or consignee, as the case may be. 

While Koontz took issue at trial with freight adjustments 

totalling $3,768.66, he never included a claim for those charges 

in his complaint. The District Court took the offered evidence of 

the settlement statements detailing the freight adjustments under 

advisement. No testimony as to the validity or invalidity of the 

specific freight adjustments was offered at trial. 

In the court's conclusion of law no. 7, it stated that 

I1Plaintiff1s claim for freight charges was not raised by the 

pleadings and therefore is barred. l1 However, in the courtls 

settling of accounts set out in conclusion of law no. 10, the court 

awards Koontz $3,768.66 in "invalid trailer charges." Sky Country 

made a motion for clarification of the award as to the I1invalid 

trailer charges.I1 The District Court denied the motion. This 
appeal ensued. 

Sky Country contends the lower court erred in awarding Koontz 

$3,768.66 in damages, denominated by the court as invalid trailer 

charges. Sky Country points out that Koontz raised a claim in his 

complaint for trailer repairs charged to him amounting to 

$4,774.24. The court ruled that those repairs were properly 

charged to Koontz. The only charges disputed by Koontz that 

totalled $3,768.66 were for freight adjustments. Sky Country 

submits that the lower court mistakenly awarded Koontz, in 

conclusion of law no. 10, the very same freight adjustment damages 

it had ruled were barred in conclusion of law no. 7. 

We must concur with Sky Country. It is clear from the facts 

and the court's conclusions that it mislabeled the award. The 

amount of $3,768.66 is clearly freight adjustment, and, as such, 

was improperly awarded to Koontz, as (1) the contract provided 

that Koontz was to be responsible for such adjustments, and (2) 

the issue as to the validity of such charges was not properly 

raised in the initial or amended pleadings. Rule 15 (a) , M.R. Civ. P. 

We reverse the judgment of the District Court as to damages 

awarded Koontz in the sum of $3,768.66. 
Justices / ''