Mason v. Smith, 760 S.E.2d 487

Catalanos owned the property of record; Sunrise purchased the delinquent 2005 tax lien and obtained a tax deed to Sunrise; the deed was recorded; notices to redeem were prepared but not properly served to Catalanos; certified mail notices to Catalanos were returned as undeliverable/unclaimed; Harpagon received the deed from Sunrise and conveyed to Don Mason, who, with Brenda Mason, purchased the property; Catalanos sued to set aside the tax deed and subsequent transfers, arguing they were not given proper notice to redeem; the circuit court granted partial summary judgment for Catalanos restoring title subject to redemption payments; Masons appealed arguing questions of fact on notice and their status as bona fide purchasers; court held the notices were not properly served and affirmed the order.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was proper notice to redeem provided to Catalanos before the tax deed?	Catalanos did not receive required notice.	Sunrise attempted service per statute but failed to deliver actual notice to Catalanos.	No valid notice; tax deed invalidated.
Did Catalanos’ lack of actual notice defeat the deed while recognizing Masons as bona fide purchasers?	Catalanos’ lack of notice should not bar Masons’ title.	Due diligence required; Masons had notice issues.	Masons were not bona fide purchasers; title restored to Catalanos.
Did the circuit court err in granting partial summary judgment without material factual disputes on notice?	Questions of material fact on notice exist.	No genuine issues; notice failure is clear.	Defer to de novo review; summary judgment affirmed.
Are the Masons entitled to challenge the chain of title based on discovery of unrecorded interests (e.g., Sunrise→Harpagon not recorded) at purchase?	Bona fide purchaser status should shield them.	Record title defects were discoverable; inquiry notice applied.	Masons not protected; not bona fide purchasers.

Wells Fargo Bank v. UP Ventures II, 223 W.Va. 407, 675 S.E.2d 883 (2009) (notice to parties of record at redemption period; due process)
Rebuild America, Inc. v. Davis, 229 W.Va. 86, 726 S.E.2d 396 (2012) (tax deed cancellation burden on the grantee; notice obligations)
Lilly v. Duke, 180 W.Va. 228, 376 S.E.2d 122 (1988) (due process notice requirements for tax sales)
Burkes v. Fas-Chek Food Mart Incorporated, 217 W.Va. 291, 617 S.E.2d 838 (2005) (insufficient service when notices undelivered)
Crowley v. Krylon Diversified Brands, 216 W.Va. 408, 607 S.E.2d 514 (2004) (service of process on corporation when mail undeliverable)
Simmons v. Simmons, 85 W.Va. 25, 100 S.E. 743 (1919) (record title puts purchaser on inquiry notice)
Rebuild America supra, 229 W.Va. 86, 726 S.E.2d 396 (2012) (see above)