Summary
The Louisiana Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, affirmed a judgment rescinding a purported cash sale deed for immovable property from Brandon M. Rowe to 4-Aces Property Management, LLC. The court held that the parties lacked a meeting of the minds and that fraud vitiated consent, based on the discrepancy between the documents signed at the jail and the recorded deed. The court also affirmed awards of $3,000 in damages, $10,000 in attorney fees, and court costs against 4-Aces Property Management, LLC.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court erred by refusing to disqualify Charles Rowe as Brandon Rowe's counsel under Louisiana Rule of Professional Conduct 3.7.
- Whether the purported sale document was enforceable despite alleged defects in authentic form and the parties' acknowledgment of their signatures.
- Whether the redemption deadline made the sale enforceable.
- Whether the trial court properly rescinded the deed and awarded damages, attorney fees, and costs.
Holdings
- The trial court properly refused to disqualify Charles Rowe because 4-Aces Property Management failed to prove that Charles was a necessary witness or that his prior ownership of the property and dismissed intervention claim required disqualification.
- The purported sale was not an enforceable sale because the parties lacked the required consent or meeting of the minds concerning whether the property was being sold or merely used as collateral for repayment of the bond obligation.
- The trial court properly found fraud and properly considered evidence outside the written deed because fraud was alleged.
- The trial court properly awarded $3,000 in damages and $10,000 in attorney fees because the rescission was granted on the basis of fraud, and the awards did not constitute an abuse of discretion.
Key quotations
“The court must find there was a meeting of the minds of the parties to constitute the requirement of consent.” (p. 12)
“These circumstances and the parties’ understandings of the agreement show that Brandon and Bowers had no meeting of the minds in relation to the status of the lakefront property.” (p. 13)
“The party against whom rescission is granted because of fraud is liable for damages and attorney fees.” (p. 15)
Factual background
Brandon Rowe sought assistance from Anthony Bowers in obtaining his release on a $36,000 bond and understood that his lakefront property would serve as collateral while he obtained funds to repay the bond within approximately 60 days. Documents signed at the jail included a handwritten repayment or redemption provision, but the recorded cash sale deed transferred the property to 4-Aces Property Management LLC and included witness signatures that were not present at the signing. Bowers subsequently acted as though he owned the property, including collecting rent from a tenant. The trial court found that Brandon did not intend to sell the property, that the parties lacked a meeting of the minds, and that the transaction involved fraud.
Procedural history
Brandon Rowe sued to rescind a purported sale of lakefront property based on lesion beyond moiety, lack of authentic form, fraud, and related grounds. The trial court initially granted and then vacated summary judgment on lesion beyond moiety after determining that genuine issues of material fact existed. After a bench trial, the court rescinded the deed as a relative nullity, found fraud, awarded $3,000 in damages and $10,000 in attorney fees, dismissed the third-party defendant, and assessed costs against 4-Aces Property Management. The company appealed, and the Louisiana Second Circuit affirmed.