In re Application for a Tax Deed
2021 IL 126150
| Ill. | 2021Background
- L.I. Brown Jr.’s mineral-rights taxes (2011) were sold at tax sale in 2013; Kathy Riley received the certificate and later assigned it to Stephen and Opal Castleman.
- Castleman obtained a 2015 circuit-court order under 35 ILCS 200/22-40(a) directing the county clerk to issue a tax deed to Castleman; redemption period expired October 10, 2015.
- The clerk erroneously issued and recorded a tax deed to William and Vicki Groome on February 29, 2016 (within the one-year post-redemption period); SI Resources later obtained a mandamus order compelling the clerk to reform the deed and a “corrective” deed to Castleman was issued October 27, 2017 (after the one-year period).
- SI Resources filed Count I seeking to void the 2017 tax deed under section 22-85 (arguing any deed recorded more than one year after redemption is automatically void) and Count II seeking to vacate the underlying 2015 order; the trial court dismissed both counts and the appellate court affirmed.
- The Supreme Court considered whether Count I stated a viable claim under section 22-85 and whether a section 22-85 claim could be raised as a declaratory-judgment action; it affirmed the dismissal of Count I.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a Count I pleading can void a tax deed under 35 ILCS 200/22-85 because the corrective deed was recorded more than one year after redemption | SI: Section 22-85 is self-executing; a deed recorded after one year is automatically void and Count I directly attacks the 2017 deed | Respondents: The one-year toll was satisfied because a deed was issued and recorded in Feb. 2016 (to Groome); the 2017 deed merely corrected/reformed that timely deed | Court: Dismissal affirmed — the 2016 deed was timely; the 2017 deed reformed the 2016 deed, so Count I fails to show a 22-85 violation |
| Whether an erroneous deed (wrong grantee) issued within the statutory year is "void" under governing principles or may be reformed/corrected | SI: The 2016 deed was void and the later 2017 deed cannot validate untimely recording under §22-85 | Respondents: The clerk had authority to issue a deed; issuing it to the wrong party was error, not voidness; mandamus reformed the deed to conform to the 2015 order | Court: The 2016 deed was erroneous but not void; mandamus and the corrective deed reformed the prior deed (relation-back rationale), preserving timeliness under §22-85 |
| Whether the plaintiff could use alternate remedies or equity to vacate the tax deed instead of the statutory routes | SI: argued limited options and that §22-85 should be enforceable directly | Respondents: Relief from a tax-deed order is governed by §22-45 and the Code of Civil Procedure (2-1203, 2-1401); equitable relief outside statutory grounds is not available | Court: SI was limited to statutory remedies; §22-45’s enumerated grounds control collateral attacks and SI alleged none of those grounds, so dismissal proper |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Application of the County Collector, 217 Ill. 2d 1 (2005) (explains limits on collateral attacks and the statutory balance preserving tax-deed marketability)
- In re Application of the County Treasurer, 92 Ill. 2d 400 (1982) (holds collateral relief in tax-deed cases is limited to fraud or voidness principles)
- Southmoor Bank & Trust Co. v. Willis, 15 Ill. 2d 388 (1958) (construes that tax-deed orders are incontestable except by direct appeal, subject to statutory relief)
- Remer v. Interstate Bond Co., 21 Ill. 2d 504 (1961) (permits fraud allegations in collateral attacks on tax-deed orders)
- In re Application of the Cook County Collector, 228 Ill. App. 3d 719 (1991) (holds clerical or procedural errors in deed issuance do not necessarily render a deed void)
- Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Sperry, 214 Ill. 2d 371 (2005) (defines when a judgment or order is void for want of jurisdiction)
- People v. Melchor, 226 Ill. 2d 24 (2007) (explains proper scope and limits of nunc pro tunc orders)