Greater Pleasant Valley Church in Christ v. Pappas
975 N.E.2d 713
Ill. App. Ct.2012Background
- Church purchased property in 2005; HUD settlement credited taxes owed by seller against price.
- Church failed to pay 2004 taxes; 2004 taxes were sold to Phoenix Bond in 2006.
- Church received notice of tax sale in 2009 and failed to redeem by June 16, 2009.
- Tax deed conveyed title to Phoenix Bond in November 2009.
- Church filed indemnity petition under 21-305 in May 2010 seeking fair market value indemnity; trial court granted directed finding against Church in June 2011; subpoenas to assessor’s counsel quashed as to irrelevance; court affirmed dismissal on liability, defining fault/ negligence per 21-305; damages phase not reached, making some issues moot.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether directed finding was proper under 21-305 | Church exercised ordinary diligence; evidence supports indemnity | Treasurer showed Church failed to act; not free of fault | Directed finding upheld; no abuse of discretion |
| Whether evidence of Church's financial ability to redeem was relevant | Evidence showed capability to pay; relevant to diligence | Not pled in indemnity petition; irrelevant | Exclusion proper; evidence irrelevant to pleaded issues |
| Whether quashing subpoenas regarding assessment was proper (moot) | Subpoenas relevant to valuation and damages | Damages not reached; issue moot | Issue moot; affirmance unaffected by subpoenas. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lakefront Plumbing & Heating, Inc. v. Pappas, 356 Ill. App. 3d 343 (2005) (abuse-of-discretion standard for indemnity petitions; diligence required to avoid fault)
- McClandon v. Rosewell, 299 Ill. App. 3d 563 (1998) (two-step analysis for directed findings under 2-1110)
- 527 S. Clinton, LLC v. Westloop Equities, LLC, 403 Ill. App. 3d 42 (2010) (two-step directed-finding standard; totality of evidence considered)
- In re Application of the County Treasurer & ex officio County Collector, 301 Ill. App. 3d 883 (1999) (indemnity context; interpretation of 21-305(a))
- Demos v. Pappas, 2011 IL App (1st) 100829 (2011) (section 22-45 direct/collateral attack on tax deeds; indemnity relevance)
- Kalata v. Anheuser-Busch Cos., 144 Ill. 2d 425 (1991) (credibility and weight of trial court findings; appellate deference to bench rulings)
- Malmloff v. Kerr, 227 Ill. 2d 118 (2007) (indemnity entitlement when conduct contributed to loss)
- Petraski v. Thedos, 2011 IL App (1st) 103218 (2011) (relevance assessment; pleadings frame issues; offer of proof principles)
- Sekerez v. Rush University Medical Center, 2011 IL App (1st) 090889 (2011) (offer of proof and exclusion rules; evidentiary preservation)