Court Opinion

ID: 9582018
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 22:21:30.842047+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:37:24.030008
License: Public Domain

ROONEY, Chief Justice,
specially concurring.
I do not believe it to be necessary to reach the issue in this case relative to “piercing the corporate veil.” The trial court found that:
“* * * The plaintiff had received * * * oral assurances * * * from Robert B. Yost that he would as sole management and apparent owner of Yost Brothers Company assume responsibility for the indebtedness as it grew for gasoline products. * * *”
The testimony was to this effect. If corroboration is required to meet the requirements of the “dead man’s statute,” § 1-12-102, W.S.19771, the unusual extension of credit over the long period of time and the July 28, 1964, written agreement provides the necessary corroboration. The agreement signed by Robert B. Yost provided in part that the stockholders, including Robert B. Yost:
“* * * individually guarantee the payment of all amounts due Harpels by Yost Brothers and hereby assume personal responsibility and liability for all such indebtedness.”
I would affirm on this basis.

. Section 1-12-102, W.S.1977, provides in pertinent part:
“ * * * no judgment or decree founded on uncorroborated testimony shall be rendered * * * adverse to the person incapable of testifying or his trustee, executor, administrator, heir or other representative. * * * ”