Nunes v. MEADOWBROOK DEVELOPMENT CO., INC.
2011 R.I. LEXIS 108
| R.I. | 2011Background
- Plaintiffs purchased property from Meadowbrook; agreed to redraw lot lines for a planned easement.
- Deed issued May 1999, did not reference the easement; Meadowbrook began using the easement years later.
- Plaintiffs sued for injunctive relief and later sought attorneys' fees, damages, and costs under warranty covenants.
- Trial court granted summary judgment denying attorneys' fees under the warranty deed; ruling said claims were not lawful.
- September 3, 2008: trial court found trespass and awarded $2,525; November 2008 judgment entered for plaintiffs.
- Rhode Island Supreme Court reviews de novo the fee issue and affirmatively decides against allowing fees under the warranty covenants.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plaintiffs are entitled to attorneys' fees under the warranty covenants | Nunes seeks fees under the fifth covenant | Defendant asserts no fee award under warranty covenants for defense of title | Fees not recoverable under warranty covenants |
| Does 'lawful claims' in the fifth covenant require successful claims to trigger defense | Lawful claims include defended title claims | Only successful claims trigger defense obligation | Lawful claims require success; no fee despite defense |
| Should Rhode Island recognize an exception permitting fee recovery when grantor attacks title | There should be an exception for grantor-initiated attacks | No exception; standard rule applies | No exception; American Rule retained |
Key Cases Cited
- Moore v. Ballard, 914 A.2d 487 (R.I. 2007) (exception to American Rule for sanctions not applicable here)
- Pearson v. Pearson, 11 A.3d 103 (R.I. 2011) (de facto limitation analysis for attorney's fees; statutory basis prominent)
- McCausey v. Oliver, 660 N.W.2d 337 (Mich.App. 2002) (lawful claims interpreted as successful claims)
- Black v. Patel, 594 S.E.2d 162 (S.C. 2004) (covenant to defend title limited to successful claims)
- Bitting v. Gray, 897 A.2d 25 (R.I. 2006) (extent of warranty covenants; possessor's rights under evanescent actions)