2014 IL App (2d) 140265
Ill. App. Ct.2014Background
- After a 2010 public tax sale, Kane County issued SIPI, LLC tax-sale certificates for 11 parcels listing a single “Amount Sold” for 2009 taxes payable 2010 but not separately itemizing taxes, special assessments, interest, and costs.
- SIPI sent statutorily prescribed section 22-5 notices to record owners that mirrored statutory format and stated a total redemption amount, but did not separately list any special assessments.
- SIPI later sought declarations of "sale in error": (1) under 35 ILCS 200/21-310(a)(5) arguing the county clerk erred by failing to itemize amounts on the certificates contrary to 35 ILCS 200/21-250; and (2) alternatively under 35 ILCS 200/22-50 arguing SIPI’s 22-5 notices were defective because they could not distinguish purchased taxes from special assessments.
- Kane County responded that no special assessments were sold (the contested charges were drainage or special-service-area taxes), the certificate totals matched sale records, and section 21-250 does not require itemization.
- The trial court denied SIPI’s motions as matters of statutory construction; SIPI appealed. The appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether section 21-250 required the county clerk to itemize taxes, special assessments, interest, and costs on tax-sale certificates, so that a failure to itemize is an "error" under section 21-310(a)(5) | SIPI: Certificates must show amounts by category; failure to itemize is an error rendering the sale voidable and entitling SIPI to refund under 21-310 | County: Section 21-250 requires stating the amount sold (a single total); itemization is not required and the totals matched records | Court: Statutory text and comparison to other provisions show only a single certificate amount is required; no error under 21-310(a)(5) |
| Whether SIPI’s section 22-5 notices were defective for failing to itemize special assessments, authorizing relief under section 22-50 now | SIPI: Strict compliance required; inability to itemize invalidates notices and supports sale-in-error relief under 22-50 because SIPI made bona fide efforts | County: Either no special assessments were sold or notices were adequate; and 22-50 applies only after a purchaser has been denied a deed for noncompliance | Court: 22-50 is contingent on a court’s refusal to issue a deed; SIPI has not been denied a deed yet, so 22-50 is inapplicable at this time |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Application for Tax Deed, 311 Ill. App. 3d 440 (Ill. App. Ct.) (statutory language should be read in context of related provisions)
- North Pole Corp. v. Village of East Dundee, 263 Ill. App. 3d 327 (Ill. App. Ct.) (distinguishing general taxes from special assessments)
- In re Application of the Kane County Collector, 297 Ill. App. 3d 745 (Ill. App. Ct.) (section 22-50 is the remedy when purchaser is refused a deed for statutory noncompliance)