Matarese v. Calise

305 A.2d 112 (1973)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P was a businessman in the town of Forio on an island off the coast of Naples, Italy. D was born in Italy but was an American citizen. D came to the U.S. from Forio in 1955. The property involved was formerly owned by DiMaio who was born in the U.S., but she had never been to Italy. Her brother, Philip, owned an unimproved parcel adjacent to that of his sister’s but occupied the residence on her land. In 1954, P purchased the unimproved parcel from Philip. P then made plans to erect a building on the land he purchased from Philip. P needed DiMaio’s property as well because his building encroached on it and he attempted to purchase it. At the time, P did not know that DiMaio did not reside in the U.S. In March 1966, D was visiting in Forio and went to P’s store, and a conversation took place between them about the purchase of the land. P asked D when he returned to the U.S. to see DiMaio and to purchase the property for him at any cost as he had started construction and his building’s foundation was on DiMaio’s land. P said he would send D money when requested to make a down payment and would send D a power of attorney to be able to transfer the land. P also told D that if he would do this for him, he would give D the entire top floor of the building on DiMaio’s property in which Philip was living. D agreed to do his best for P. D then contacted DiMaio and secured a deed on her property but placed it in his own name. D then sent a telegram to his mother asking that $3,000 be sent to him on the purchase price of $22,000. The mother showed the letter to P who thought that D had purchased for him, so P sent the $3,000. At trial the judge found that no more than $3,000 was paid for the property and that the $22,000 listed in the telegram was used as a set up to defraud P. D claimed that the telegram company had merely made a mistake. D’s father recorded the deed in Italy. The trial judge found that D had worked the scheme to perfection noting that D not only had record title but he also had $3,000 of P’s money in hand and he was not out of pocket in making the purchase and P desperately wanted the property. When P sued D, D was a resident of Rhode Island, and he eventually went back to Italy in August 1969. The trial judge concluded that D had perpetrated a fraud upon P and that D therefore held the property in a constructive trust for the benefit of P. The trial judge then ordered D to convey the property to P. The judge reasoned that even though the property was in Italy and the suit was in Rhode Island the court had jurisdiction over the person of D and thus had the power to order conveyance of the land outside its territorial limits. The court then ordered D to convey and that if he did not convey the court would appoint a commissioner to do so in D’s name. D appealed.