Beaumont Homes, LLC v. Colonial/Jordan Properties, LLC
| Docket Number: | 2010-CA-00810-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-04-2011 Opinion Author: Irving, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Contract - Duty to disclose - Attorney’s fees - M.R.A.P. 4(d) Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Griffis, P.J., Myers, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton, Maxwell and Russell, JJ. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - OTHER |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 05-06-2010 Appealed from: Madison County Chancery Court Judge: Cynthia Brewer Disposition: GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANTS Case Number: 2006-864 |
|
| Consolidated: Consolidated with 2009-CA-01173-COA Beaumont Homes, LLC v. Colonial/Jordan Properties, LLC, SMCDC, Inc., Mark S. Jordan and Dee C. Denton; Madison Chancery Court; LC Case #: 2006-864; Ruling Date: 06/22/2009; Ruling Judge: Cynthia Brewer | ||
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Beaumont Homes, LLC |
KEN R. ADCOCK |
|
|
| Appellee: | Colonial/Jordan Properties, LLC | CLYDE X. COPELAND SAMUEL L. ANDERSON MATTHEW W. VANDERLOO | ||
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: | Contract - Duty to disclose - Attorney’s fees - M.R.A.P. 4(d) |
| Summary of the Facts: | Beaumont Homes, LLC entered into a contract with Colonial/Jordan Properties, LLC for the purchase of land “as is.” Beaumont intended to build a house on the property. However, following the sale, Beaumont learned that the Madison County Board of Supervisors had placed a temporary moratorium on the issuance of building permits for the property due to past problems with flooding. Beaumont filed suit against Colonial/Jordan, alleging breach of contract, negligence, misrepresentation/negligent misrepresentation, fraudulent concealment, and breach of fiduciary duties and the duty of good faith and fair dealing, for failure to disclose the flooding problems on the property and the temporary moratorium on the issuance of building permits. Colonial/Jordan filed a motion for summary judgment, which the chancery court granted. Colonial/Jordan filed a motion for attorneys’ fees, which the chancery court granted. The chancery court entered an order assessing attorneys’ fees at $5,000. Beaumont Homes appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Duty to disclose Beaumont argues that there is a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether Colonial/Jordan had a duty to disclose the property’s flooding problems and the moratorium on the issuance of building permits. The sales contract contained an “as is” provision. An “as is” clause in a contract exempts a seller from liability pertaining to the condition of the property. There is no contention that Beaumont, a sophisticated party in the business of purchasing and developing real estate, did not understand the terms of the contract. Therefore, Beaumont is bound by the mutually agreed upon terms of the contract, which absolve Colonial/Jordan of any liability pertaining to the condition of the property. Furthermore, because the sale involved real property without a dwelling, the statutory disclosure requirements that accompany land sales do not apply. Issue 2: Attorney’s fees Beaumont argues that the chancery court erred in awarding attorneys’ fees because the issue was raised for the first time in a post-trial motion. Furthermore, Beaumont argues that the chancery court was without jurisdiction to grant the award because Beaumont had already filed its appeal. The fact that the fee request was made after the entry of judgment is not a proper basis for denying the fee award. Under M.R.A.P. 4(d), a timely notice of appeal is suspended pending the disposition of post-trial motions. Upon their disposition, a party’s notice of appeal is revived. Colonial/Jordan filed its motion for attorneys’ fees on June 29, 2009. Beaumont filed its first notice of appeal, which related to the chancery court’s grant of summary judgment, on July 16, 2009. The chancery court entered its order awarding attorneys’ fees of $5,000 on May 6, 2010. Therefore, Colonial/Jordan’s motion for attorneys’ fees was a pending post-trial motion at the time the first notice of appeal was filed. Thus, the chancery court maintained its jurisdiction over the post-trial motion for attorneys’ fees, even though Beaumont had filed its notice of appeal from the chancery court’s decision granting summary judgment. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
