R & R Land Development, L.L.C. v. American Freightways, Inc.
2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1620
Mo. Ct. App.2012Background
- R&R appeals a trial court judgment for American on fraud, breach of contract, specific performance, and rescission from a real estate deal.
- R&R contends rescission was proper due to mutual or unilateral mistake about the April 2, 2001 transaction.
- The trial court found American believed in good faith it held fee simple title but held there was no mutual/unilateral mistake about the April 2 transaction.
- An April 2, 2001 quitclaim deed was exchanged for $29,000 after R&R demanded conveyance that day.
- R&R previously breached the original contract by not paying earnest money or closing by the deadline.
- The court held there was no material mistake and affirmed judgment for American, rejecting unjust enrichment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was there a mutual or unilateral mistake about the April 2 transaction? | R&R argues there was a mistake about title and transaction terms. | American argues no material mistake occurred; quitclaim terms were intended. | No, the trial court's finding against material mistake was not against the weight of the evidence. |
| Did the absence of a material mistake justify denying rescission? | R&R asserts rescission required due to mistake about title. | American contends the mistake was not material to the April 2 agreement. | Yes, the court properly denied rescission. |
| Does unjust enrichment apply where there was an express contract? | R&R seeks restitution despite an express contract. | Unjust enrichment does not apply when an express contract governs the subject matter. | Unjust enrichment does not apply. |
Key Cases Cited
- Heinze v. Hobson, 622 S.W.2d 17 (Mo.App.1981) (mutual mistake standard; rescission limits)
- Croy v. Zalma Reorganized Sch. Dist R-V of Bollinger Cnty., 434 S.W.2d 517 (Mo.1968) (mutual mistake burden and reliance on title status)
- Byrd v. Liesman, 825 S.W.2d 38 (Mo.App.1992) (freedom to bargain; risk allocation in contracts)
- Parks v. MBNA America Bank, 204 S.W.3d 305 (Mo.App.2006) (negligence in understanding contract consequences; unjust enrichment limits)
- Houston v. Crider, 317 S.W.3d 178 (Mo.App.2010) (deference to trial court on weight of evidence; factual review)
- Pearson v. Roster, 367 S.W.3d 36 (Mo. banc 2012) (standard of review for trial court judgments; deference to findings)