In re Application of the County Treasurer & ex officio County Collector
977 N.E.2d 189
Ill. App. Ct.2012Background
- Petitioner Z Financial, LLC sought a tax deed for unit A-33, 405 North Wabash Parking Condominium, Chicago, after a 2005 tax sale.
- Notice and service were pursued under the Property Tax Code, with multiple owners/parties listed and various addresses used for service.
- Respondent ALSJ, Inc. challenged service and notice, asserting noncompliance with notice/diligence requirements and inconsistent addresses.
- Respondent served Rule 216 admissions requests; petitioner's initial answer was unsigned by a sworn statement, signed only by counsel.
- A supplemental sworn affidavit was later filed, but the trial court denied deeming admissions; respondent argued this violated Rule 216(c).
- Trial court ultimately granted the tax deed, but the appellate court reversed and remanded to address Rule 216(c) noncompliance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rule 216(c) noncompliance warranted deeming admissions | Z Financial relied on attorney-driven responses with later sworn affidavit cure. | ALSJ contends no timely sworn denial; admissions should be deemed. | Yes, failure to provide sworn verification was fatal; admissions deemed. |
| Whether petition complied with notice/diligence requirements for tax deed | Petitioner conducted due diligence and proper notice; service details support compliance. | Notice/service defects taint compliance with the Code and due diligence obligations. | Remand required to assess compliance with notice and due diligence. |
Key Cases Cited
- Vision Point of Sale, Inc. v. Haas, 226 Ill. 2d 334 (2007) (strict Rule 216 compliance; discovery efficiency)
- Moy v. Ng, 341 Ill. App. 3d 984 (2003) (attorney may respond on behalf of client; party verification required)
- Brookbank v. Olson, 389 Ill. App. 3d 683 (2009) (requires timely sworn affidavits; counsel-only responses insufficient)
- Skotticelli v. Club Misty, Inc., 406 Ill. App. 3d 958 (2010) (recognizes counsel-authored responses; not overruling Brookbank)
- Tires ’N Tracks, Inc. v. Dominic Fiordirosa Construction Co., 331 Ill. App. 3d 87 (2002) (harsh consequence of Rule 216 admissions; impact on credibility)
- Bright v. Dicke, 166 Ill. 2d 204 (1995) (Rule of law controlling the force of Supreme Court rules)