Opinion ID: 2547527
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Whether the trial court erred in awarding attorney's fees based on Hooker's improper filing of the lis pendens.

Text: ¶ 18. Hooker filed a lis pendens in Carroll County but took no other action to pursue a claim against Greer. A lis pendens is intended to serve as notice to the world of an alleged claim of a lien or interest in the property. Aldridge v. Aldridge, 527 So.2d 96, 99 (Miss.1988). Filing a lis pendens is a preliminary action necessary to file a civil action to enforce an interest in property. See Miss.Code Ann. §§ 11-47-3, 11-47-9 (Rev.2002). The lis pendens filing provides notice to the public of an alleged claim on land. Aldridge, 527 So.2d at 99. ¶ 19. It is undisputed that Hooker took no action with respect to the lis pendens from August 2005, when he filed the lis pendens, until after Greer filed his suit in May of 2009 to remove the cloud on title. There is further no issue that the lis pendens filing was without any legal or arguable basis, as Hooker had no alleged claim on Greer's land in Carroll and Holmes Counties. We therefore affirm the trial court's finding that the filing of the lis pendens was without basis in fact or law, and was without substantial justification.
¶ 20. Hooker argues that the LAA does not authorize awarding attorney's fees based on the filing of a lis pendens. While the filing of the lis pendens notice itself does not constitute an action subject to the LAA, a defense to an action to remove a lis pendens, filed without substantial justification, may form the basis of an award under the LAA. ¶ 21. The LAA allows costs and expenses for claims or defenses asserted without substantial justification: [I]n any civil action commenced or appealed in any court of record in this state, the court shall award . . . reasonable attorney's fees and costs against any party or attorney if the court, upon the motion of any party or on its own motion, finds that an attorney or party brought an action, or asserted any claim or defense, that is without substantial justification, or that the action, or any claim or defense asserted, was interposed for delay or harassment. Miss.Code Ann. § 11-55-5(1) (Rev.2002) (emphasis added). The LAA defines an action as involving not only a claim, but also a defense: Action means a civil action that contains one or more claims for relief, defense or an appeal of such civil action. For purposes of this chapter only, an action also means any separate count, claim, defense or request for relief contained in any such civil action. Miss.Code Ann. § 11-55-3 (Rev.2002) (emphasis added). ¶ 22. The LAA provides for the award of attorney's fees for actions taken by parties or their attorneys within the confines of a civil action. The provisions of the LAA are in harmony with those of Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 11, which allows for the awarding of attorney's fees as a sanction. Rose v. Tullos, 994 So.2d 734, 738 (Miss.2008). The LAA merely augments Rule 11 by stating that the court shall specifically set forth the reasons for awarding attorney fees and costs and enumerates factors which shall be considered by the court. Rose, 994 So.2d at 738 (quoting Stevens v. Lake, 615 So.2d 1177, 1184 (Miss.1993)). The LAA's definition of action, in which it also discusses claims and  defenses,  is similarly designed to restrict the LAA's applicability to filings within the confines of a civil action. See Miss.Code Ann. § 11-55-3; see also Randolph v. Lambert, 926 So.2d 941, 944 (Miss.Ct.App.2006) (The court will only award fees when a party brings frivolous or bad faith litigation. ) (emphasis added).
¶ 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).