Excalibur Energy Co. v. Rochman, 2014 IL App (5th) 130524

Excalibur Energy filed a second-amended ejectment complaint seeking ownership of Franklin County property on the theory that a tax deed to Rochman’s predecessor was void for lack of notice to Excalibur’s titleholder (Gould Trust).
The record shows tax deeds in 1997 and 2008; 1997 deed did not describe the disputed property, and subsequent 2008 corrective deeds included the property and the Gould Trust’s interest, then Rochman’s quitclaim deed transferred it.
Gould Trust held a mineral interest subject to Riverside’s prior interests; Riverside later conveyed to the Gould Foundation, which ultimately transferred a mineral interest to Excalibur Energy, linking Excalibur to prior taxable interests.
Excalibur alleged Franklin County, as trustee, issued the tax deed without proper notice and without diligent inquiry, rendering the deed void and the title transfer invalid.
The circuit court granted summary judgment for Excalibur, voiding the tax deed and awarding possession, but the appellate court reversed, remanding with directions to dismiss the ejectment complaint.
The court held that a tax deed’s validity is largely incontestable except by specific routes (direct appeal or 2-1401 petition), and that Excalibur’s ejectment action was not a proper vehicle to attack the tax deed; the appropriate remedy would require a 2-1401 petition, which was not properly invoked here.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Can Excalibur’s ejectment action attack a tax deed void for lack of notice?	Excalibur contends ejectment seeks to quiet title and enforce possession notwithstanding void tax deed.	Rochman argues ejectment is an improper vehicle to challenge a tax deed and that relief requires proper 2-1401 petition.	Ejectment cannot be used to attack a void tax deed; 2-1401 is the proper remedy.
Whether a 2-1401 petition can vacate a tax deed due to lack of notice, and what grounds apply.	Excalibur would rely on lack of notice as grounds to seek relief from a void judgment.	Only the four grounds in 22-45 and 2-1401 are allowed, and Excalibur did not pursue a valid 2-1401 petition in the proper proceeding.	2-1401 provides limited avenues; relief must be sought via proper petition in the same proceeding, which was not done.
Is a tax deed generally incontestable and subject to direct appeal or 2-1401 proceedings, limiting collateral challenges?	Tax deed should be challengeable to protect true ownership when due process failures occur.	Tax deeds are virtually incontestable except by specified direct routes; collateral actions are inappropriate.	Tax deeds are largely incontestable; grounds for relief are limited to specified direct avenues.

S.I. Securities v. Powless, 403 Ill. App. 3d 426 (Ill. App. 5th Dist. 2010) (tax deed provisions aim to be incontestable; limits relief to specified avenues)
In re Application of the County Treasurer & ex officio County Collector, 2013 IL App (3d) 120999 (Ill. App. 3d 2013) (sets out grounds for relief under 22-45 and 2-1401)
Elliott v. Johnson, 156 Ill. App. 3d 70 (Ill. App. 1987) (treatment of tax deed challenges and procedural paths)
In re Application of Hamilton County Treasurer, 96 Ill. App. 3d 158 (Ill. App. 1981) (premises that quiet title suits are not proper attacks on tax deeds)
McCann v. Laster, 19 Ill. App. 3d 407 (Ill. App. 1974) (proper vehicle for attacks on tax titles; avoid collateral routes)
Sarkissian v. Chicago Board of Education, 201 Ill. 2d 95 (Ill. 2002) (voidness of judgments; section 2-1401(f) applies to void judgments)