Stitching Mayflower Mountain Fonds v United Park City Mines Company

Fonds appealed summary judgment to Company on its public road and prescriptive easement claims and the denial of its motion to amend the complaint. The Court affirmed. It first held that because Company and the entity it sold property to were represented by the same attorney, made the same arguments and have interest in the property involved here, there was standing. It next held that Fonds failed to prove a public road under federal mining law because its proof at most showed use for 10 years before the land became private, the law in 1871 when the use started required 20 years use and the 1880 highway law which reduced the time frame to 5 years only applied prospectively and thus claims under either regime failed. It held that Fonds failed to preserve its argument about the prescriptive easement before the district court as it did not show that its evidence created a genuine issue of material fact and merely attached evidence instead without making any legal argument at summary judgment. It finally affirmed the denial of the motion to amend as the motion came 9 years into the litigation and adding new claims would cause new delay and Fonds had been ordered to identify the legal basis for any claim and failed to do so before the deadline.