LEGAL DOCUMENT

Case: Gail C. CAHALAN et al. v. WEETAMOE ASSOCIATES et al.
Citation: 668 A.2d 1268
Court: Supreme Court of Rhode Island
Jurisdiction: Rhode Island
Decision Date: 1996-01-05
Docket Number: No. 94-738-Appeal
Pages: 1268–1268
Volume: 668
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Second Series

Parties: Gail C. CAHALAN et al. v. WEETAMOE ASSOCIATES et al.

Gail C. CAHALAN et al. v. WEETAMOE ASSOCIATES et al.
No. 94-738-Appeal.
Supreme Court of Rhode Island.
Jan. 5, 1996.
Patrick Conley, Providence.
Mark Pogue, Providence.

ORDER
This case came before a hearing panel of this court December 19,1995, pursuant to an order that had directed the plaintiffs to appear in order to show cause why their appeal should not be denied and dismissed. After hearing the oral arguments of counsel and examining the memoranda filed by the parties, we are of the opinion that cause has not been shown.
The plaintiffs had purchased certain real estate at a tax sale from the town of Bristol. They claim from the successor mortgagee, NLI/East Coast Land Partnership, L.P. (NLI) which redeemed the property certain rents that had been collected from tenants who occupied the property during the time that the plaintiffs were the owners pursuant to the tax sale. It is undisputed that NLI did not collect any of these rents. The rents were collected by the former owners of the fee, Weetamoe Associates. Consequently, the trial justice held that the successor mortgagee which had paid all sums necessary for redemption was not liable for the rents which it had never collected. Therefore, the trial justice held that Ashness v. Burr’s Lane Associates, 640 A.2d 522 (R.I.1994) was not applicable, nor was Driscoll v. Karroo Land Co., 600 A.2d 722 (R.I.1991). We agree.
Consequently, the plaintiffs’ appeal is denied and dismissed. The judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed.
MURRAY, J., did not participate.