Meredith v. Meredith
| Docket Number: | 2006-CP-02135-COA | |
| Oral Argument: | 01-24-2008 | |
* This video is best viewed in the most current version of Google Chrome, Internet Explorer with Windows Media Player plug-in, or Safari (Mac Users). |
||
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 07-01-2008 Opinion Author: IRVING, J. Holding: Reversed and Rendered |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Real property - Attorney’s fees - Frivolous suit - Settlement Judge(s) Concurring: LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., BARNES AND ISHEE, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): KING, C.J., CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, ROBERTS AND CARLTON, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - REAL PROPERTY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-30-2006 Appealed from: MADISON COUNTY CHANCERY COURT Judge: William Joseph Lutz Disposition: GRANTED MOTION FOR SANCTIONS Case Number: 2006-147 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | H.L. MERIDETH, JR. |
H.L. MERIDETH, JR. (PRO SE) |
|
|
| Appellee: | PHILIP T. MERIDETH, M.D. | DONALD J. BLACKWOOD, ROBERT L. GOZA | ||
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Real property - Attorney’s fees - Frivolous suit - Settlement |
| Summary of the Facts: | Sonny Merideth and his son, Philip, have been involved in a series of lawsuits. Sonny filed suit against Philip, seeking to cancel and set aside a deed from Sonny to Philip. After negotiations, Sonny and Philip settled their dispute and entered into an escrow agreement. Philip requested attorney’s fees during the negotiations, but Sonny refused. The settlement that was ultimately reached did not include attorney’s fees or make any reservation regarding attorney’s fees. Thereafter, Philip filed a motion for attorney’s fees, costs, and injunctive relief. The chancellor declined to grant injunctive relief; however, he awarded attorney’s fees and costs to Philip in the amount of $18,764. Sonny appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Sonny sought to set aside a transfer of property that he had made to Philip, contending that Philip was required to build a house on the land but had not done so. However, the deed in question mentions nothing about any requirement to build a house. The only evidence that such a condition existed is a letter that Sonny allegedly wrote to Philip. However, the letter introduced by Sonny contains no signatures or other acknowledgment by Philip. Therefore, the letter is insufficient to meet the standards of the statute of frauds. Sonny has not produced any other evidence. As such, his lawsuit against Philip was frivolous and without merit. Were there no settlement in this case, the chancellor would have been correct in awarding Philip attorney’s fees and costs. Philip has neither contested the validity of that settlement nor sought to have it withdrawn. The evidence is also uncontested that Philip sought attorney’s fees as part of the settlement, but Sonny refused. Philip did nothing further to recoup his expenses until Sonny filed another lawsuit against him. Clearly, when Philip came to an arrangement with Sonny and signed the escrow agreement, he relinquished his claim to attorney’s fees, because he did not reserve the issue for resolution by the court. Therefore, the chancellor’s award of sanctions in the form of attorney’s fees and costs is reversed. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
