Opinion ID: 2547527
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The defense of the complaint to remove cloud on title

Text: ¶ 23. Greer asserts that, even if the filing of a lis pendens is not considered an action, Hooker's defense of the lis pendens in his Answer provided the basis for an award of attorney's fees under the LAA. We agree with Greer that the LAA provides for attorney's fees awards based on a frivolous or bad-faith defense. However, the trial court's judgment is clear that the award was based on Hooker's filing of the lis pendens. [11] Since the LAA does not support a sanction based on Hooker's filing of the lis pendens, we vacate the trial court's award. On remand, the court should, consistent with today's opinion, consider whether to award attorney's fees for the defense to Greer's action to remove the lis pendens. See Miss.Code Ann. § 11-55-5(1) (the court shall award . . . reasonable attorney's fees and costs against any party or attorney if the court. . . finds that an attorney or party . . . asserted any claim or defense, that is without substantial justification.) (emphasis added).