Radbod v. Mohim Superior Court, 269 A.3d 1035

Background

Ebrahim alleges oral agreements (1997) with his sister Masomeh for a 50% interest in a DC commercial property (1427 H St NE); he paid sums from 1997–2006 and regularly paid half the expenses, but no deed was executed.
Masomeh bought a Virginia condo in 2002, put the deed in son Michael’s name, and agreed to sell Ebrahim a 50% interest; Ebrahim paid $34,000. He later bought Michael’s share (price paid 2008–2012) but no deed was recorded.
On July 6, 2006 Masomeh executed a deed transferring the DC property to Michael while reserving a life estate; Ebrahim was present but did not read the deed. On December 16, 2007 Ebrahim and Michael signed a one-page agreement describing them as equal owners of both properties.
Ebrahim discovered renovations and a lease at the DC property in November 2014, and sued Oct. 27, 2017 for breach, fiduciary duty, conversion, unjust enrichment, fraud, and equitable relief (quiet title, constructive trust, partition).
After discovery Michael moved for summary judgment; the Superior Court granted summary judgment for both defendants without notice, dismissing Virginia claims for lack of personal jurisdiction and dismissing or limiting DC claims as time‑barred or barred by the statute of frauds.
On appeal the D.C. Court of Appeals reversed: it held the court erred to enter sua sponte summary judgment without Rule 56(f) notice, PJ challenges were waived, subject‑matter jurisdiction existed for equitable relief affecting out‑of‑state land, and genuine disputes existed on the discovery rule and partial performance exceptions to the statute of frauds.

Issues

Issue	Ebrahim's Argument	Defendants' Argument	Held
Sua sponte summary judgment / Rule 56(f) notice	Court lacked authority to grant SJ for Masomeh or on unraised grounds without prior notice and opportunity to present evidence	SJ was proper as requested by Michael; no separate motion needed	Court of Appeals: Sua sponte SJ impermissible here because Superior Court gave no Rule 56(f)/Tobin‑style notice; vacated SJ
Personal jurisdiction over defendants for Virginia property	D.C. courts had PJ (defendants had D.C. contacts; Michael admitted PJ for litigation) and any PJ challenge was waived	Superior Court concluded no PJ over the defendants for Virginia claims	Held PJ challenge was waived (not timely raised); dismissal for lack of PJ was erroneous
Subject‑matter jurisdiction to order relief affecting out‑of‑state land	A court of equity with PJ over the parties may order actions (e.g., deeds) affecting land in other jurisdictions when necessary to give full effect to decree	Court questioned jurisdiction over Virginia property	Held Superior Court had subject‑matter jurisdiction to adjudicate most Virginia‑property claims under equitable principles (but flagged potential limits re: quiet title)
Statute of limitations (discovery rule)	Claims didn’t accrue until Nov. 2014 when Ebrahim discovered renovations and the life estate; triable issues on inquiry/actual notice	Court held accrual at Jul. 6, 2006 meeting; claims outside 3‑year period barred	Held genuine disputes exist about when Ebrahim knew or should have known; summary judgment premature
Statute of frauds (oral land sale)	Partial/full performance (payments, expense contributions) estops defendants from invoking statute of frauds	Court held oral agreements unenforceable and barred profit‑sharing claims	Held record shows sufficient evidence of partial performance to create a triable issue; SJ on statute‑of‑frauds ground improper

Key Cases Cited

Tobin v. John Grotta Co., 886 A.2d 87 (D.C. 2005) (sua sponte summary judgment requires prior notice/opportunity to present evidence)
Thomas v. District of Columbia, 942 A.2d 1154 (D.C. 2008) (same; court may grant sua sponte SJ only with notice)
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (summary judgment standards)
Massie v. Watts, 10 U.S. 148 (1810) (equity can bind parties to acts affecting land in other jurisdictions)
Phelps v. McDonald, 99 U.S. 298 (1878) (equitable power to affect out‑of‑state property to give effect to decree)
Ramirez de Arellano v. Weinberger, 745 F.2d 1500 (D.C. Cir. 1984) (federal appellate discussion of equitable relief affecting foreign land)
Bussineau v. President & Directors of Georgetown College, 518 A.2d 423 (D.C. 1986) (accrual/injury timing principles)
Ehrenhaft v. Malcolm Price, Inc., 483 A.2d 1192 (D.C. 1984) (discovery rule for breach of contract accrual)
Diamond v. Davis, 680 A.2d 364 (D.C. 1996) (inquiry notice and reasonableness of investigation under discovery rule)
Interdonato v. Interdonato, 521 A.2d 1124 (D.C. 1987) (partial performance exception to statute of frauds)
Brown v. Brown, 343 A.2d 59 (D.C. 1975) (equitable estoppel/partial performance can remove transaction from statute of frauds)