Real Estate Law

Plaintiff filed suit against Defendant, Stewart Title Guaranty Company, alleging breach of contract. The parties contract required Defendant to remove encumbrances on Plaintiff’s title “in a reasonably diligent manner.” Plaintiff alleged, in part, that Defendant’s conduct amounted to a breach of the policy because Defendant pursued time intensive litigation designed to settle the liens for less money, rather than immediately tendering the full-face value of the lien. Following a bench trial, Court found in favor of Defendant. Court properly found in favor of Defendant. Defendant removed all liens within 18 months and the title insurance policy granted Defendant discretion in the manner in which claims are to be resolved.

Plaintiff, Lake Point Tower Association, filed a forcible entry and retainer action against Defendant to obtain possession of Defendant’s condominium. Defendant filed a motion to dismiss, alleging that Plaintiff lacked authority to initiate litigation because the Board failed to vote at an open meeting before doing so in violation of the Condominium Property Act and the appellate court's decision in Palm. Court erred by granting Defendant’s motion. Even assuming the motion raised a meritorious defense, Court abused its discretion by dismissing the complaint with prejudice and denying Plaintiff the opportunity to amend the complaint. The Board voted at an open meeting before Court dismissed the action, thus eliminating Defendant’s basis for asserting that it did not have authority to litigate.

Court properly dismissed petition for issuance of a tax deed, finding Petitioner was ineligible to obtain a tax deed due to interests it held in the property. Petitioner held a pretax sale interest in the property through a mortgage prior to tax sale through which the delinquent taxes were sold. Under principles of equity, a lienor may not obtain a tax deed and thereby cut off interest of other lienors or mortgagees.(STEIGMANN and KNECHT, concurring.)

Plaintiff company tried to foreclose on property after homeowners died, but their daughter fought foreclosure. Quitclaim deed of husband, conveying property to his wife, contains a sufficient description of property to convey it. After wife died intestate, husband inherited some portion of property through wife's estate, which he was able to convey through mortgage. Plaintiff alleged sufficient facts and it is unknown how much husband inherited as probate estate was not opened immediately after wife's death. Section 2-619 dismissal was error; remanded for proceedings including discovery. (PIERCE and MASON, concurring.)

Court properly dismissed 2 counts of Plaintiff's complaint against City, seeking to eject City from a disputed portion of real property. Court properly concluded that proprietor of plat of addition effected a statutory dedication of disputed property for public use. City accepted dedication for public use of its portion of disputed property. Court properly determined that disputed property was subject to public use.(HUDSON and HUTCHINSON, concurring.) 

(Court opinion corrected 4/6/17.)Dispute over construction defects discovered at a condominium complex. Condo association and its board of directors sued developers and president of Association's initial board of directors. Court erred dismissing suit, andin finding Association had waived its claims against Defendants by failing to follow mandatory dispute resolution procedures set forth in article 12 of declaration. As that article was later amended, Association could properly proceed directly to suit without first seeking mediation or arbitration. Releases are not alternate basis to affirm court's dismissal, as facts as alleged in complaint show that person who signed releases did not have authority to execute them. (LAMPKIN and REYES, concurring.)

Plaintiff filed condemnation suit to obtain easement rights over farmland so that it could build and operate a new underground pipeline. Landowner Defendants opposed suit and filed a traverse and motion to dismiss, which court denied. After jury trial on condemnation complaint, directed verdict entered for Plaintiff as to amount of just compensation it was required to pay to landowners. Plaintiff was not required to tender its land market survey to landowners during negotiations to satisfy good-faith requirement. Court properly barred testimony of landowners as to property value as directly contrary to their prior deposition testimony and as improper attempt to avoid court's bar of their expert appraiser's testimony. No evidence that jury had been prematurely discharged, as trial judge was scheduling jury's presence in courtroom to minimize inconvenience to jurors in allowing them to phone courthouse to determine if their appearance was required. (HOLDRIDGE and LYTTON, concurring.)