Opinion ID: 2756277
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Adel's Motion for Summary Judgment

Text: Adel's motion for summary judgment rests on two arguments: first, that he still holds title to the Vacant Lot pursuant to the quitclaim deed issued to him by the town of Alton in August 2005, and second, that Deutsche Bank's mortgage interest in the Vacant Lot is invalid because Alia was not a bona fide purchaser for value. We address each in turn. Under New Hampshire law, the party seeking to quiet title bears the burden of establishing his good title to the property against the interests of all others. Porter v. Coco, 910 A.2d 1187, 1191 (N.H. 2006). Counts I and II of Adel's complaint -5- ollapse into one another for purposes of this analysis. See id. (Quiet title petitions essentially seek a declaratory judgment from the court regarding the parties' land interests.). Adel points to the August 2005 quitclaim deed as evidence of his good title; Deutsche Bank counters that he is estopped from claiming title pursuant to the deed from the town because Adel conveyed the property to his son in January 2002 by warranty deed. New Hampshire recognizes the doctrine of estoppel by deed, which prevents a party from denying representations made in a valid deed. See Hilco Prop. Servs., Inc. v. United States, 929 F. Supp. 526, 545 (D.N.H. 1996) ([A] party who has executed a deed, is thereby estopped from denying not only the deed itself, but every fact it recites and every covenant it contains . . . [including] his grant thereof to the [grantee].) (citing Foss v. Strachn, 42 N.H. 40 (1860)). Even if an individual does not possess clear title at the time he grants the deed, he is estopped from denying the grant of the deed once his title is perfected. White v. Ford, 471 A.2d 1176, 1178 (N.H. 1984); Kimball v. Blaisdell, 5 N.H. 533, 535 (1831) (If A convey[s] lands to which he has no title, to B, with warranty, any title which A may subsequently acquire, will enure to the benefit of B, and A cannot claim the land against his deed.). The parties are in agreement that Adel's deed to Amir described the Vacant Lot, on which the town then held a lien due to -6- unpaid taxes. Thus, when Adel deeded the property to Amir in 2002, he did not hold complete title to the Vacant Lot. Deutsche Bank argues that the title issue was cured when the taxes were paid off by Adel's mortgagee and the town deeded the Vacant Lot back to Adel in 2005. As the district court correctly noted, the Supreme Court of New Hampshire's opinion in White v. Ford supports Deutsche Bank's argument. In White, an uncle conveyed property to his nephew by quitclaim deed while the property was held by the town under a tax collector's deed. Id. at 1177. Some evidence indicated that the nephew loaned the uncle money to pay the taxes owed to the town, and the uncle continued to live on the property until he died. Id. The Supreme Court of New Hampshire held that the uncle's after-acquired title passed to the nephew based on the doctrine of estoppel by deed. Id. at 1178. Similarly, any deficiencies in Adel's title passed to Amir when Adel's mortgagee paid the taxes owed to the town of Alton in 2005, making fully valid his conveyance of the Vacant Lot to Amir in January 2002. Thus, as of August 3, 2005, it was Amir rather than his father who held title to the Vacant Lot, and thus Adel cannot meet his burden to establish his good title to the Vacant Lot. The district court rightly denied his motion for summary judgment as to Counts I and