Reeves v. Meridian Southern Railway, LLC
| Docket Number: | 2010-CA-00057-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 05-10-2011 Opinion Author: Griffis, P.J. Holding: Affirmed in part, reversed and rendered in part. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Real property - Conversion - Fixture - Unjust enrichment - Doctrine of laches - Trespass to land - Nominal damages Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Irving, P.J., Myers, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - REAL PROPERTY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-10-2009 Appealed from: Clarke County Circuit Court Judge: Robert Bailey Disposition: Granted Summary Judgment in Favor of Appellee Case Number: 2008-169-B |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Richard Reeves and Rega, Inc., A Mississippi Corporation |
ERIC TIEBAUER |
|
|
| Appellee: | Meridian Southern Railway, LLC | ROBERT M. DREYFUS JR. | ||
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 - Conversion - Fixture - Unjust enrichment - Doctrine of laches - Trespass to land - Nominal damages |
| Summary of the Facts: | Meridian Southern Railway, LLC, owns and operates a short-line railroad that runs between Meridian and Waynesboro. Along this line, there are small segments of track that branch off from the main line. These small segments are called “spurs.” Meridian Southern owns some of the spurs, while other people or entities also own some of the spurs. Meridian Southern is paid to store railcars, and it uses some of the spurs for that purpose. Meridian Southern takes control of the railcars at Meridian, stores some of the railcars at its Meridian facilities, and disperses others for storage on the spurs. In March 2000, Meridian Southern started to use a spur located on a tract of land in Clarke County. At that time, the land was owned by Clarke County, but it was occupied and used by Griffco Plastics Company. Griffco gave Meridian Southern an oral license to use the spur. Subsequently, Griffco abandoned the property, but Meridian Southern continued to use the spur. After Griffco abandoned the property, Meridian Southern continued to store railcars on the spur; and the property owner, Clarke County, never objected to the continued use of the spur. In 2006, Clarke County sold the land to Rega, Inc. Neither Clarke County nor Rega informed Meridian Southern of the sale. Meridian Southern continued to use the spur for the next twenty months without any objection from Rega. In 2008, Meridian Southern had six railcars stored on the spur when employees for Rega installed and locked a derail device on the lead railcar. This device trapped the six railcars onto the spur. After learning of this, Meridian Southern employees, accompanied by a local police officer, went to the property and tried to get the six railcars off the spur. They cut the lock off the derail device. At that point, Richard Reeves, a shareholder of Rega, arrived on the scene and objected to the removal of the railcars. Meridian Southern employees immediately ceased their attempt to remove the railcars, replaced the lock on the derail device with an identical one, and left the property. Thereafter, Meridian Southern filed a complaint for replevin. Rega answered the complaint and asserted ten counterclaims. Subsequently, Rega released the six railcars, and the replevin claim was dismissed. Meridian Southern then moved for summary judgment on Rega’s counterclaims. The circuit court granted summary judgment. Rega and Reeves appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Rega argues that Meridian Southern converted the spur when it continued to store railcars on the spur after Rega had acquired the property. There is a conversion only when there is an intent to exercise dominion or control over goods which is inconsistent with the true owner's right. The tort of ‘conversion’ is an intentional exercise of dominion and control over personal property or a chattel, that so seriously interferes with the right of another to control that property that the tortfeasor may justly be required to pay the other the full value of the property. Here, Rega’s spur is a fixture. It is a part of the realty. It is not personal, or moveable, property. It is not chattel. Therefore, it is not property that can be converted. The circuit court’s grant of summary judgment on this issue was proper. Rega also argues that Meridian Southern has been unjustly enriched. Unjust enrichment is an equitable doctrine and, therefore, is subject to equitable defenses. One of those defenses is laches. The doctrine of laches states: equity aids the vigilant and not those who slumber on their rights. Here, Rega allowed Meridian Southern to use the spur for twenty months after Rega had acquired ownership of it. During that time, Rega neither notified Meridian Southern of the change in ownership nor objected to Meridian Southern’s use of the spur. In fact, the first act Rega took to assert its rights to the spur was to install and lock a derail device, which trapped six of Meridian Southern’s railcars on the spur. Under these circumstances, the circuit court was correct to deny Rega the aid of equity. Rega argues that Meridian Southern trespassed when it placed railcars on the spur without Rega’s permission. A trespass to land is committed when a person intentionally invades the land of another without a license or other right. A trespass is committed even if the trespasser has a good-faith belief that he has a right to enter the land. Furthermore, the landowner may recover nominal damages, even if he fails to show any actual damages. Meridian Southern contends that it had a good-faith belief that it had a right to use the spur. However, that is not a defense to trespass. Although a trespass was committed, in response to the summary-judgment motion, Rega did not offer any evidence that the trespass had caused actual damages. There is nothing in the record or the briefs to indicate that the spur or the surrounding property had been damaged or that Rega had otherwise been injured by Meridian Southern’s use of the spur. In fact, Meridian Southern claimed that it had maintained and repaired the spur over the years. Thus, the circuit court’s grant of summary judgment is reversed and a judgment rendered in favor of Rega and Reeves in the total amount of $10.00. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
