952 N.W.2d 292
Iowa2020Background
- Benskin, Inc. obtained loans from West Bank in 2006–2007 secured by mortgages on Dickinson and Polk County property; a 2007 line of credit matured May 30, 2008 and the bank was obligated to release the 2007 mortgages thereafter.
- Benskin alleges West Bank repeatedly promised to release the 2007 mortgages but failed to do so; the bank first expressly refused to release them on June 27, 2011.
- In 2016 Benskin learned additional facts suggesting West Bank improperly recorded an advance under the line of credit in 2008; the encumbrances nevertheless remained of record.
- Benskin sued May 18, 2018 asserting breach of written contracts (Counts I–II), breach of implied good-faith duties (Count III), later amending to add fraud (Count IV) and slander of title (Count V).
- The district court dismissed all counts as time‑barred and held the slander claim failed for lack of publication; the court of appeals reversed and reinstated all claims.
- The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed dismissal of Counts I–IV (statute of limitations) but reversed the dismissal of Count V, holding that recording an encumbrance satisfies the publication element for slander of title, and remanded for further proceedings on that claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Which statute of limitations governs breach-of-written-contract claims against a state bank? | Benskin: general longer limitation (§ 614.1(5) or pre-2011 § 524.221 eleven‑year rule) applies. | West Bank: the post‑2011 § 524.221(2) (seven‑year total) governs claims brought after the amendment. | § 524.221(2) (seven years from breach) applies to written-contract claims against state banks; Counts I–II time‑barred. |
| Does the discovery rule toll § 524.221(2)? | Benskin: discovery rule or later discoveries (2016) delay accrual. | West Bank: § 524.221(2) is triggered by a specific event; discovery rule inapplicable. | Discovery rule does not apply to § 524.221(2); accrual tied to breach/record entry, so contract and related good‑faith claims accrued by 2008. |
| Can equitable estoppel toll the § 524.221(2) limitations period here? | Benskin: West Bank’s promises lulled it into not suing; equitable estoppel applies to avoid the time‑bar. | West Bank: Benskin knew by June 27, 2011 and had reasonable time left; no later affirmative promises tolled the period. | Equitable estoppel may apply in principle, but under pleaded facts Benskin was on notice by June 27, 2011 and waited unreasonably long; estoppel fails as a matter of law; Counts III–IV time‑barred. |
| Does recording an encumbrance constitute publication for slander of title? | Benskin: public filing of an encumbrance satisfies publication element. | West Bank: plaintiff failed to specifically allege recording under the statute; no third‑party publication pleaded. | Yes: recorded documents are publicly accessible and satisfy publication; slander‑of‑title claim adequately pleaded and reinstated. |
Key Cases Cited
- MidWestOne Bank v. Heartland Co-op, 941 N.W.2d 876 (Iowa 2020) (specific statutory provision controls over general statute of limitations)
- Mormann v. Iowa Workforce Dev., 913 N.W.2d 554 (Iowa 2018) (contours of discovery rule and equitable tolling; plaintiff must plead diligence)
- Legg v. West Bank, 873 N.W.2d 763 (Iowa 2016) (relationship of express contract terms and good‑faith duty)
- Christy v. Miulli, 692 N.W.2d 694 (Iowa 2005) (equitable estoppel ends when plaintiff knows or should know the truth)
- Rieff v. Evans, 630 N.W.2d 278 (Iowa 2001) (notice‑pleading standard; pleadings construed in plaintiff’s favor but may plead oneself out of court)
- Fischer v. Bar Harbor Banking & Trust Co., 673 F. Supp. 622 (D. Me. 1987) (recording liens and encumbrances is sufficient publication for slander of title)