JLP v. William Royce, Allen County Treasurer, Nicholas D. Jordan, Allen County Auditor, and BLN Investments, LLC (mem. dec.)
02A05-1703-MI-460
| Ind. Ct. App. | Oct 31, 2017Background
- JLP (a general partnership) owned real property in Allen County; JLP had provided the county auditor with an old business address (Ley address) after moving and using a P.O. box, but did not update the auditor’s records.
- The parcel became delinquent for 2014 taxes; the auditor sent the three statutorily required notices (notice of tax sale; notice of right of redemption; notice of petition for tax deed) initially by certified mail to the Ley address, all of which were returned "UNCLAIMED/UNABLE TO FORWARD."
- Each returned certified notice was followed by mailing a duplicate via regular first-class mail to the Ley address; those second mailings were not returned, but JLP never received them.
- The auditor also published the notice in a newspaper and searched auditor records for alternative addresses; no additional address was found in county auditor records.
- A tax deed issued and title passed through purchasers to BLN, which then filed to quiet title; JLP moved to set aside the tax deed under Trial Rule 60(B) asserting inadequate (constitutional) notice. The trial court denied relief and granted BLN summary judgment; JLP appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (JLP) | Defendant's Argument (BLN/Auditor) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether auditor provided constitutionally adequate notice of tax-sale proceedings | Notices were not actually received; auditor should have found JLP’s updated P.O. box (search county records/inter-agency) | Auditor substantially complied with statutory notice scheme (certified then first-class mail, publication, records search); owner bears duty to update address | Court held notice was constitutionally adequate; tax deed valid |
| Whether tax deed void for failure to follow statutory notice requirements | Statutory notices did not accomplish actual notice and auditor should have done more | Notices complied with statutory procedure and follow-up mail satisfied due-process standard | Court held substantial compliance with statutes and no deprivation of due process |
| Whether BLN had superior title / summary judgment appropriate | Title holder argues deed void -> JLP retains title | BLN argues deed valid and title quieted by summary judgment | Court granted summary judgment to BLN; BLN is fee simple owner |
| Whether auditor had duty to perform broader, county-wide searches for updated owner address | Auditor should have used other county records (zoning administrator had P.O. box) | No statutory duty to perform open-ended, inter-agency searches; burden would be excessive | Court rejected expanded duty; auditor not required to search beyond auditor records |
Key Cases Cited
- Iemma v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., 992 N.E.2d 732 (Ind. Ct. App.) (tax-deed presumption can be rebutted; notices must substantially comply with statute)
- Prince v. Marion County Auditor, 992 N.E.2d 214 (Ind. Ct. App.) (due process requires notice reasonably calculated to apprise owner under circumstances)
- Marion County Auditor v. Sawmill Creek, 964 N.E.2d 213 (Ind.) (auditor’s multi-pronged notice efforts satisfied due process despite owner not receiving actual notice)
- Jones v. Flowers, 547 U.S. 220 (2006) (following up with regular mail after failed certified delivery can be reasonable step toward providing notice)
- Schaefer v. Kumar, 804 N.E.2d 184 (Ind. Ct. App.) (tax deed void if owner not given constitutionally adequate notice)
- Kessen v. Graft, 694 N.E.2d 317 (Ind. Ct. App.) (Trial Rule 60 governs appeals of tax-deed issuance)
- Lindsey v. Neher, 988 N.E.2d 1207 (Ind. Ct. App.) (failure to comply substantially with tax-sale statutes renders subsequent tax deeds void)