DiNicola v. Ely, et al., No. 23 MISC 000128 (2023), Berkshire County (Land Court May 25, 2023)

Does the Massachusetts Land Court have subject matter jurisdiction over claims concerning a family trust that holds record title to nine pieces of real property where such claims do not involve a dispute over a right, title or interest in the real property owned by the Trust? The Land Court recently answered this question “no” DiNicola v. Ely, et al., No. 23 MISC 000128, Berkshire County (Land Court May 25, 2023) (Smith, J.).

In DiNicola, the plaintiff, individually and as the beneficiary of the family trust at issue (the “Trust”), filed an action in the Land Court against her father and brother, the trustees of the Trust, for alleged wrongdoing in their handling of the business of the Trust, which holds record title to and manages nine pieces of real property in Berkshire County. In particular, the plaintiff alleged that her father and brother collected rents from the properties, paid operating expenses, and took all the net income generated by the properties for their personal use, without sharing the net income with her in her capacity as a beneficiary of the Trust. The plaintiff further alleged that her brother caused the Trust to convey one of the properties to a third party without her knowledge, consent, or authorization.

Based on these allegations, the plaintiff’s complaint sought: (1) a declaration that she is a beneficiary of the Trust; (2) an order, pursuant to G. L. c. 203E, § 411, that terminates the Trust and imposes a constructive trust over all of the remaining real property owned of record by the Trust; (3) an order approving a memorandum of lis pendens on all of the remaining properties of the Trust; and (4) an accounting pursuant to G. L. c. 203E, § 813. 

The father and brother moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims against them under Mass. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. In particular, they argued that the plaintiff’s claims should be dismissed because they only concern trust matters under the Massachusetts Uniform Trust Code, G. L. c. 203E, et seq. (the “MUTC”) and do not allege a controversy involving a right, title or interest in property owned by the Trust. Therefore, according to the father and brother, the plaintiff’s claims fall outside the general equity jurisdiction of the Land Court as prescribed in G. L. c. 185, § 1(k).

The plaintiff opposed the defendants’ motion to dismiss, arguing that, because the business of the Trust is to own and operate real property, her claims fall within the Land Court’s jurisdiction pursuant to its decision in Perry v. Lauria, 22 LCR 585 (2014) (Sands, J.). The Land Court disagreed and granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss under Mass. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

To reach this decision, the Land Court first discussed the scope of the Land Court’s general equity jurisdiction under G.L. c. 185, § 1 et seq. and Massachusetts decisional law, holding that “[a]bsent a controversy that implicates the special expertise of the Land Court to adjudicate disputes involving a right, title or interest in land, the court has no jurisdiction to hear the case.” Citing O’Donnell v. O’Donnell, 74 Mass.App.Ct. 409, 411-12 (2009); Steele v. Kelley, 46 Mass.App.Ct. 712, 725 (1991).

The Land Court then discussed the differences between the plaintiff’s claims and those asserted in Perry v. Lauria, 22 LCR 585 (2014) (Sands, J.).  In particular, the Land Court pointed out that, unlike the claims at issue in Perry v. Lauria, which sought a judicial determination as to the ownership of real property, the plaintiff’s claims are for breach of a fiduciary duty or violation of the MUTC. Because these claims do not involve a controversy over a right, title or interest in the real property owned by the Trust, the Land Court concluded that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the case.