Danforth v. Gautreau

556 A.2d 217, 1989 Me. LEXIS 64
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedMarch 30, 1989
StatusPublished

This text of 556 A.2d 217 (Danforth v. Gautreau) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Danforth v. Gautreau, 556 A.2d 217, 1989 Me. LEXIS 64 (Me. 1989).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant Daniel Gautreau appeals from summary judgment granted to plaintiffs Judith A. Danforth and Robert L. Chick in a mortgage foreclosure action in the Superior Court (Oxford County, Brodrick, J.). On appeal defendant argues principally that a genuine issue of material fact exists concerning the ownership of the subject property. Finding no error, we affirm.

Gautreau defaulted on a promissory note and mortgage held by plaintiffs. He also failed to pay real estate taxes on the mortgaged property from 1984 through 1987, and municipal tax liens were filed against the property. The plaintiffs filed suit against Gautreau demanding foreclosure and sale pursuant to 14 M.R.S.A. §§ 6321-6325 (1980 & Supp.1988). Subsequently, Gautreau paid the taxes and obtained a municipal tax deed, which he then sought to assert as a defense to the plaintiffs’ foreclosure action. It is established, however, that “a mortgagor can not buy in a tax title and assert it successfully against a mortgagee”, York County Sav. Bank v. Wentworth, 136 Me. 330, 335, 9 A.2d 265, 268 (1939), quoting Dunn v. Snell, 74 Me. 22, 24-25 (1882), Phinney v. Day, 76 Me. 83, 86 (1884), and Dalton v. Lessard, 136 Me. 94, 96, 2 A.2d 172 (1938). See also Gardiner v. Gerrish, 23 Me. 46, 50-51 *218 (1843), Fuller v. Hodgdon, 25 Me. 243, 249 (1845). Thus, there was no genuine issue of material fact presented, and the Superi- or Court did not err in granting summary judgment. The defendant’s remaining arguments are without merit and do not warrant discussion.

Because we find that this appeal is frivolous, we award attorney fees in the amount of $500 to the plaintiffs plus treble costs. M.R.Civ.P. 76(f).

The entry is:

Judgment affirmed.

Defendant Gautreau to pay to plaintiffs Judith Danforth and Robert Chick attorney fees of $500 plus treble costs.

All concurring.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Gardiner v. Gerrish
23 Me. 46 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1843)
Fuller v. Hodgdon
25 Me. 243 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1845)
Dunn v. Snell
74 Me. 22 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1882)
Phinney v. Day
76 Me. 83 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1884)
Dalton v. Lessard
2 A.2d 172 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1938)
York County Savings Bank v. Wentworth
9 A.2d 265 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1939)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
556 A.2d 217, 1989 Me. LEXIS 64, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/danforth-v-gautreau-me-1989.