All American Processing, Inc. v. Ruckdeschel
| Docket Number: | 2010-CA-00522-COA Linked Case(s): 2010-CA-00522-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 08-30-2011 Opinion Author: Ishee, J. Holding: Reversed and rendered |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Real property - Cancellation of lis pendens - Section 11-47-3 - Ownership interest in property Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Irving and Griffis, P.JJ., Myers, Barnes, Carlton, Maxwell and Russell, JJ. Concur in Part, Concur in Result 1: Roberts, J., concurs in part and in the result without separate written opinion Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - REAL PROPERTY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-22-2009 Appealed from: Jackson County Chancery Court Judge: Jaye A. Bradley, Sr. Disposition: REVERSED COUNTY COURT AND REINSTATED LIS PENDENS ON REAL PROPERTY WHICH APPELLANT ATTEMPTED TO SELL Case Number: 2008-2769 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | All American Processing, Inc. |
JASON B. PURVIS |
|
|
| Appellee: | Lawrence M. Ruckdeschel and Katherine R. Ruckdeschel | JAMES H. COLMER JR. JASON M. PAYNE | ||
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 - Cancellation of lis pendens - Section 11-47-3 - Ownership interest in property |
| Summary of the Facts: | Lawrence Ruckdeschel and Katherine Ruckdeschel contracted with Hurricane Homes, Inc. to construct a modular home to be placed on the Ruckdeschels’ property in Pascagoula. Hurricane Homes operated its business on property leased to it by All American Processing, Inc. In February 2008, after Hurricane Homes failed to complete the contracted modular home, the Ruckdeschels filed suit in circuit court against Hurricane Homes. In June 2008, the Ruckdeschels procured a lis pendens in connection with the circuit court action on the property owned by All American and leased to Hurricane Homes. Subsequently, All American filed suit in the Jackson County County Court, seeking the release and cancellation of the lis pendens. The Ruckdeschels then amended their complaint in circuit court to add All American as a defendant in the action. After the county court conducted a hearing on All American’s claim, it cancelled the lis pendens in July 2008. The Ruckdeschels appealed the county court’s ruling to chancery court which reversed the county court’s judgment and reinstated the lis pendens. All American appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | The evidence shows that the Ruckdeschels employed section 11-47-3 in obtaining the lis pendens at issue. The Ruckdeschels used their circuit court action against Hurricane Homes to obtain a lien on the property owned by All American and leased to Hurricane Homes. The Ruckdeschels claim an ownership interest in All American’s property because they paid Hurricane Homes for work that was never completed. Because Hurricane Homes paid All American to lease the property, the Ruckdeschels also argue that the money paid by them to Hurricane Homes was ultimately converted into All American’s corporate assets when Hurricane Homes paid for its lease. The Ruckdeschels further assert that Hurricane Homes’ operation on All American’s property grants them the right to a lis pendens. Although the extent to which particular property must be “involved in”, or “affected by”, litigation in order to render the doctrine of lis pendens applicable may, of course, be governed by statute, it is clear that some form of identifiable “property” must be directly involved in the litigation, and, further, that the litigation to which the doctrine is sought to be applied must “involve” the particular property to which the doctrine is sought to be applied. Here, Hurricane Homes and All American are two distinct entities, and the action between the Ruckdeschels and Hurricane Homes is not tied to All American. The subject property is only indirectly tied to the Ruckdeschels’ legal actions because Hurricane Homes operated its business on the property as a lessee. Because Hurricane Homes was a lessee, it had no ownership interest in the subject property. Furthermore, it is clear that Hurricane Homes had no ownership interest in All American, and vice versa. The subject property has no direct involvement in the Ruckdeschels’ claims against Hurricane Homes or All American, and the Ruckdeschels have presented no evidence of a rightful claim to an interest in the property. Accordingly, the judgment of the chancery court is reversed and rendered to cancel the lis pendens. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
