Be Careful Where You Throw Your Cigarette ButtsThe Maryland Court of Appeals affirmed a jury verdict, finding Steamfitters Local Union 602 (Steamfitters) liable for the damages in excess of $1.2 million caused for a fire that spread to its neighbor’s property. The fire started because people on Steamfitters’ property discarded cigarette butts into mulch. The Court held that Steamfitters had a common law duty to use reasonable care, and it was up to the jury to determine whether Steamfitters had breached its duty. Steamfitters Local Union No. 602 v. Erie Insurance Exchange, et al.; Steamfitters Local Union No. 602 v. Cincinnati Insurance Company, et al., 469 Md. 704 (2020). Although Steamfitters contended that it owed no duty to its neighbor, the Court noted that for at least 80 years, it has recognized that ownership, operation, and maintenance of property is accompanied by a common law duty to use reasonable care not to cause harm to neighboring property owners. Contact Ed Levin | 410-576-1900 Lenders: Don’t Worry if You Lose Your Deeds of TrustWhat if you lose a deed of trust en route to the clerk’s office, so the deed of trust does not get recorded? The Maryland Court of Special Appeals (CSA) held that a copy of the deed of trust was sufficient to establish the lender’s position, and the deed of trust would have lien priority from the date it was executed. Popkin v. Federal National Mortgage Association, No. 2289, Sept. Term 2018, 2020 WL 5588676 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. Sept. 18, 2020). In Popkin, Raphael Davy, Jr. executed a deed of trust (the Refinance Deed of Trust) encumbering his home in favor of PHH Mortgage Corp. to secure a loan (the Refinance Loan). The Refinance Deed of Trust was lost or misplaced, and so it was never recorded. PHH had possession of the original promissory note secured by the Refinance Deed of Trust. PHH transferred the note, along with ownership of the Refinance Loan and the beneficial interest in the Refinance Deed of Trust, to Fannie Mae. Contact Ed Levin | 410-576-1900 An Estoppel Certificate Might Not Amend a LeaseDoes an estoppel certificate signed by a tenant with terms that vary from the underlying lease amend the lease? Not necessarily, according to the Fourth Circuit’s decision in Expo Properties, LLC v. Experient, Inc., 956 F.3d 217 (4th Cir. 2020). Experient Inc. (Tenant) leased property from Expo Properties, LLC (Landlord) under a lease signed in 1994, which had been amended five times (altogether, the Lease). When Tenant prepared to vacate the property in 2012, Landlord asked Tenant to perform significant move-out work, including repairs to the roof; heating, ventilation, and air conditioning system; and carpeting. Tenant refused, claiming that the Lease did not require Tenant to perform the work. Contact Ed Levin | 410-576-1900 |
