Congress Street Properties, LLC, et al. v. BMR Funding, LLC
| Docket Number: | 2010-CA-01584-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 01-24-2012 Opinion Author: Lee, C.J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Real property - Deed of trust - Material alteration of deed Judge(s) Concurring: Irving and Griffis, P.JJ., Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton, Maxwell and Russell, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Fair, J. Nature of the Case: CIVIL - REAL PROPERTY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-02-2010 Appealed from: Hinds County Chancery Court Judge: J. DeWayneThomas Disposition: CONFIRMED FORECLOSURES BY APPELLEE Case Number: G2009-1965 W/4 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Congress Street Properties, LLC and 930 Blues Cafe, LLC |
SUZANNE GRIGGINS KEYS |
|
|
| Appellee: | BMR Funding, LLC | DONALD ALAN WINDHAM WILLIAM L. SMITH TARA PIERRE ELLIS | ||
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 - Deed of trust - Material alteration of deed |
| Summary of the Facts: | BMR Funding LLC filed two lawsuits in the Hinds County Chancery Court to eject Congress Street Properties LLC and 930 Blues Café LLC from commercial properties BMR had acquired through foreclosure proceedings. Both CSP and 930 Blues Café were owned by Isaac K. Byrd. The cases were consolidated, and the chancellor ultimately found in favor of BMR, ordering Byrd to relinquish possession of the properties to BMR. Both CSP and 930 Blues Café appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | CSP argues that clear and convincing evidence proves the CSP deed of trust was materially altered, rendering it void. The material alteration of a deed is an affirmative defense that must be proved by clear and convincing evidence. Furthermore, to render the deed of trust void, the alteration must be the result of fraud and not an honest mistake or omission. CSP contends the alteration was fraudulent because Byrd stated he never intended for the CSP deed of trust to encumber the property located at 933 North President Street, and the CSP deed of trust was re-recorded without his knowledge of the attachment. However, it is clear from the record that the re-recording of the CSP deed of trust to include Exhibit A was not a fraudulent alteration. In regard to the 930 Blues Café deed of trust, Byrd argues the deed of trust was intended to secure only the $200,000 payment. Where the contract is not ambiguous, the intention of the contracting parties should be gleaned solely from the wording of the contract. The 930 Blues Café deed of trust states the property was used to secure payment of the $200,000 as well as “other amounts due and payable or which may become due and payable under this Deed of Trust, the Reaffirmation Agreement[,] or any other agreement between Grantor and Beneficiary. . . .” Since this Reaffirmation Agreement was referred to in the deed of trust, this document must be construed along with the 930 Blues Café deed of trust. According to the Reaffirmation Agreement, the $200,000 payment was a “partial credit against the indebtedness.” This agreement also states that failure to pay “all amounts payable by Grantor to Beneficiary pursuant to the Reaffirmation Agreement and this Deed of Trust” triggers a default. And under the agreement, the $200,000 is considered “a credit against the indebtedness.” The chancellor determined the 930 Blues Café deed of trust specifically provided that it secured the full indebtedness, not just the $200,000 payment. There is substantial evidence in the record to support the chancellor’s decision. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
