772 F.3d 951
1st Cir.2014Background
- Adel Fadili owned two non-contiguous lots in Alton, NH: a house lot (132 Rogers Road) and an unimproved vacant lot; both were bisected by Roger Street.
- In January 2002 Adel conveyed “land located at Mount Major Road” to his son Amir by warranty deed; that deed’s legal description described the Vacant Lot (not the House Lot).
- The town seized the Vacant Lot in 2002 for unpaid taxes; Adel’s mortgagee paid the tax debt in 2005 and the town quitclaimed the Vacant Lot back to Adel in August 2005.
- In 2006 Amir conveyed (by deed using the 2002 legal description) the property to his sister Alia, who mortgaged it; that mortgage was later assigned to Deutsche Bank.
- Alia defaulted; Deutsche Bank sought to foreclose on the Vacant Lot. Adel sued to quiet title and to invalidate Alia’s mortgage; district court granted summary judgment for Deutsche Bank.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Fadili) | Defendant's Argument (Deutsche Bank) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Adel hold title to the Vacant Lot based on the 2005 quitclaim from the town? | The 2005 quitclaim reconveyed the Vacant Lot to Adel, so he holds title. | Adel conveyed the Vacant Lot to Amir in 2002; any after-acquired title passed to Amir by estoppel by deed. | Estoppel by deed applies; title vested in Amir (and thus not in Adel). Summary judgment for bank on quiet title. |
| Is Alia’s mortgage invalid because she was not a bona fide purchaser for value? | The recorded 2005 quitclaim put Alia (and her mortgagee) on record notice, so she was not a BFP; mortgage invalid. | The 2002 warranty deed from Adel to Amir (describing the Vacant Lot) divested Adel; a proper title search would show Amir’s interest, so Alia’s mortgage stands. | Adel lacks standing to invalidate the mortgage because he holds no superior title; summary judgment for bank on mortgage challenge. |
| Did the district court err in granting summary judgment on the cross-motions? | Adel argued factual disputes (intent, notice) required denial of summary judgment. | Deutsche Bank argued estoppel by deed and recorded instruments resolve title as a matter of law. | Court applied de novo review, found no genuine dispute of material fact on title; affirmed summary judgment for bank. |
| Could parol evidence or reformation save Adel’s claim (intent to convey House Lot)? | Adel contended parties intended to transfer the House Lot despite the written description. | Written deed controls; no equitable reformation was sought below and parol evidence cannot rewrite a clear deed. | Parol evidence/reformation not available at this stage; deed language controls. |
Key Cases Cited
- White v. Ford, 471 A.2d 1176 (N.H. 1984) (after-acquired title passes to grantee under estoppel by deed)
- Porter v. Coco, 910 A.2d 1187 (N.H. 2006) (plaintiff seeking to quiet title bears burden to prove good title)
- OneBeacon Am. Ins. Co. v. Commercial Union Assurance Co. of Can., 684 F.3d 237 (1st Cir. 2012) (standard for evaluating cross-motions for summary judgment)
- Jakobiec v. Merrill Lynch Life Ins. Co., 711 F.3d 217 (1st Cir. 2013) (de novo review of summary judgment)