Alana Harrison v. Montgomery Cnty., Ohio
997 F.3d 643
6th Cir.2021Background
- Ohio law allows counties to foreclose tax-delinquent, abandoned property via a Board of Revision and transfer title "free and clear" to a land bank, extinguishing liens and any surplus equity rather than selling at auction.
- Alana Harrison inherited a one-half interest in her deceased mother’s Dayton home; Montgomery County’s Board foreclosed for ~$19,664 in delinquent taxes and transferred the property to the county land bank.
- The Board found fair market value of $22,600, leaving roughly $3,000 in surplus equity (net ≈ $891 after costs); Ohio’s land-bank statute provides no mechanism for returning surplus to the owner.
- Harrison did not appeal the Board decision or seek Ohio mandamus/inverse-condemnation relief; about 10 months later the Supreme Court decided Knick, which eliminated the state-exhaustion requirement for federal takings claims.
- After Knick, Harrison filed a § 1983 takings suit in federal court challenging the extinguishment of her surplus equity; the district court dismissed under Ohio claim-preclusion rules.
- The Sixth Circuit reversed and remanded, holding Knick permits a federal takings suit after a final decision and that Ohio claim preclusion, the Tax Injunction Act, and comity did not bar Harrison’s federal claim; the merits were left for the district court to decide.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Ohio claim preclusion bars Harrison’s federal takings claim | Knick removed state-exhaustion requirement; claim ripe only after Board’s final transfer and she filed after Knick | Harrison could and should have raised the takings claim earlier (answer, appeal, or in state court) | Reversed: claim preclusion does not bar the federal claim because the takings claim was not ripe until the Board’s final decision and Knick prevents a preclusion trap |
| Whether Knick’s change in ripeness/exhaustion controls here | Knick permits filing a § 1983 takings claim in federal court once a final decision effects a taking; Harrison filed after Knick | County contends earlier opportunities (complaint response or removal to common pleas) sufficed to present the federal claim | Court: Knick governs; the federal takings claim was not ripe until the Board’s transfer, so earlier steps did not require filing the federal claim |
| Whether the Tax Injunction Act or principles of comity bar the federal suit | TIA/comity do not apply because Harrison challenges post-collection extinguishment of surplus equity, not tax assessment/collection | County argued federal courts should abstain or are barred by TIA/comity | Held: TIA and comity do not bar Harrison’s § 1983 action (distinguishing collection from post‑collection disposition) |
| Whether the case should be decided on the merits now | Harrison seeks just compensation for extinguished surplus equity | County urged deference to state remedies/threshold state-process issues; merits unresolved | Court remanded for the district court to address the merits (including possible historical evidence on takings) |
Key Cases Cited
- Knick v. Township of Scott, 139 S. Ct. 2162 (2019) (eliminated requirement to seek compensation in state court before bringing a federal § 1983 takings claim)
- Williamson County Regional Planning Comm’n v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, 473 U.S. 172 (1985) (ripeness requirement: final decision before takings claim is ripe)
- San Remo Hotel, L.P. v. City and County of San Francisco, 545 U.S. 323 (2005) (state-court takings judgments can have claim-preclusive effect in federal court)
- Migra v. Warren City School District Board of Education, 465 U.S. 75 (1984) (full faith and credit requires federal courts give state-court judgments same preclusive effect as state law)
- Palazzolo v. Rhode Island, 533 U.S. 606 (2001) (final decision concept and ripeness discussion in takings context)
- Freed v. Thomas, 976 F.3d 729 (6th Cir. 2020) (Tax Injunction Act does not bar federal suits challenging post-collection refusal to refund surplus foreclosure proceeds)
- Wayside Church v. Van Buren County, 847 F.3d 812 (6th Cir. 2017) (pre‑Knick decision applying exhaustion/claim‑preclusion principles to takings claims)
- Moore v. Hiram Township, 988 F.3d 353 (6th Cir. 2021) (federal constitutional claims may be raised on appeal from Ohio administrative decisions)
- State ex rel. Shemo v. Mayfield Heights, 765 N.E.2d 345 (Ohio 2002) (mandamus is the proper Ohio remedy to compel appropriation proceedings for alleged involuntary takings)