Opinion ID: 2226740
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Is MPC entitled to attorney fees?

Text: MPC asserts a successful plaintiff in a slander of title action is entitled to attorney fees as a part of its damages. The parties, by stipulation, reserved this question for the court before MPC rested its case. By posttrial motion MPC brought the issue before trial court. The motion was denied. The question apparently is one of first impression in this jurisdiction. Ordinarily a successful party cannot recover attorney fees in Iowa in absence of a special statute, contract, or third-party action. Turner v. Zip Motors, Inc., 245 Iowa 1091, 1098, 1100, 65 N.W.2d 427, 431-32 (1954). Unless authorized by statute, attorneys' fees generally are not recoverable [in slander of title actions] either as damages or as costs. 50 Am.Jur.2d Libel and Slander § 550, at 1068 (1970). The authorities relied on by MPC, including Glass v. Gulf Oil Corp., 12 Cal.App.3d 412, 96 Cal.Rptr. 902 (1970); Glusman v. Lieberman, 285 So.2d 29 (Fla.App.1973); and Summa Corp. v. Greenspun, 607 P.2d 569 (Nev.1980), also involve quiet title actions or proceedings to nullify some disparaging instrument placed on record. This is consistent with our quiet title act, which provides for a minimal attorney fee under certain conditions. See § 649.5, The Code 1981. See also Restatement (Second) of Torts § 633 (1977). We find no good cause to depart from our standing rule that forecloses an award of attorney fees to plaintiff in this tort action. We modify and affirm on condition, and remand on the appeal. We affirm on the cross-appeal. Costs are taxed to EFCO. MODIFIED AND AFFIRMED ON CONDITION, AND REMANDED ON THE APPEAL; AFFIRMED ON THE CROSS-APPEAL.