In Re: B.L. Strickler, An Incapacitated Person ~ Appeal of: Blackhawk Property Investors, LLC
2651 C.D. 2015
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | Oct 12, 2016Background
- Brenda Strickler was adjudicated an incapacitated person in 2009; Gary L. Landis (First Guardian) was appointed plenary guardian. Strickler’s residence at 3884 Hearthstone Court became vacant after her husband died and taxes went unpaid for 2012–2013.
- York County Tax Claim Bureau (Bureau) scheduled a tax upset sale in September 2014; the Bureau mailed certified notice to the property address but the certified receipt was returned unsigned and marked “return to sender.”
- The Bureau thereafter mailed first-class notice to the property address (not returned) and posted the property (the poster noted the residence was not owner-occupied), but made no further efforts to locate Strickler or her guardian.
- Purchaser (Blackhawk Property Investors) bought the property, obtained a deed, and filed a quiet title action; a default judgment was entered after notices were sent to the nursing-home address (which was not First Guardian’s correct address).
- First Guardian (then removed and replaced by Emerald Guardian Services, LLC — Second Guardian) timely sought to open the default and to set aside the tax sale, alleging the Bureau failed to satisfy the Tax Sale Law’s mandatory notice and additional-search requirements. The trial court set aside the sale; Purchaser appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Order of addressing petitions (open default judgment vs set aside sale) | Purchaser: court should resolve motion to open default judgment first because it establishes title. | Second Guardian: due process issues common to both petitions; court may address set-aside petition first. | No reversible error; court permissibly granted petition to set aside sale without first ruling on opening default given consolidated due-process issues. |
| Effect of confirmation and failure to file objections within 30 days | Purchaser: confirmation nisi started 30-day clock; failure to file objections bars challenge unless owner shows prejudice under §607(b.1). | Second Guardian: §607(b.1) deals with post-sale notice; Section 602/607.1 pre-sale notice failures can defeat sale even after confirmation; §607(g) preserves notice challenges. | Held for Second Guardian: confirmation does not preclude setting aside a sale when mandatory pre-sale notice/§607.1 efforts were not made. |
| Bureau’s compliance with notice obligations (Sections 602 and 607.1) | Purchaser/Bureau: mailed notices and posting satisfied statutory duties; first-class mail not returned. | Second Guardian: certified mail returned unsigned, property vacant, and Bureau failed to search tax collector records, county indices, its own files, or otherwise locate guardian — so it did not exercise required reasonable efforts. | Trial court and appellate court: Bureau failed to make required reasonable efforts under §607.1 and §602(e)(2); sale set aside. |
| Guardian’s fault for unpaid taxes; party status and fees | Purchaser: First Guardian’s neglect caused sale; First Guardian should not benefit. Purchaser: First Guardian remains a party on appeal; no discontinuance. | First Guardian: he was removed as guardian and thus should not be a party; purchase’s continued joinder was frivolous and merits fees. | Held: focus is statutory notice compliance, not owner/agent neglect; First Guardian remains a named appellee absent stipulation or discontinuance; fee request denied (appeal not frivolous). |
Key Cases Cited
- Geier v. Tax Claim Bureau of Schuylkill County, 588 A.2d 480 (Pa. 1991) (due process requires meaningful notice and reasonable efforts to locate owners for tax sale notices)
- Tracy v. Chester County Tax Claim Bureau, 489 A.2d 1334 (Pa. 1985) (taxing bureaus must investigate to ascertain identity and whereabouts of owners)
- Farro v. Tax Claim Bureau of Monroe County, 704 A.2d 1137 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1997) (bureau’s duty limited to owners of record and ordinary business efforts to find addresses)
- Maya v. County of Erie Tax Claim Bureau, 59 A.3d 50 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2013) (additional notification insufficient when bureau fails to discover alternative in-county address the taxpayer used for other filings)
- Rice v. Compro Distrib., Inc., 901 A.2d 570 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2006) (bureau bears burden to prove statutory notice compliance)
- McElvenny v. Bucks County Tax Claim Bureau, 804 A.2d 719 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2002) (same)
- McFarland v. Whitman, 544 A.2d 929 (Pa. 1988) (standards to open default judgment)
- Husak v. Fayette County Tax Claim Bureau, 61 A.3d 302 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2013) (quiet title judgment has no preclusive effect on owner not a party)