338 So.3d 87
La. Ct. App.2022Background
- Precept purchased tax-sale title to 1508 Westbrook Drive (Orleans Parish) at a tax sale on April 8, 2015; the tax-sale certificate was recorded April 20, 2015.
- Archon Information Systems sent pre-sale notices to Patrick Elmore; Gina Elmore was not listed on the pre-sale notice.
- Archon and/or Precept sent post-sale/redemption notices to Patrick and Gina Elmore after the sale; the property was not redeemed by the April 20, 2018 deadline.
- Precept filed suit to quiet and confirm title on November 13, 2018; the Elmores filed an answer and reconventional demand seeking annulment of the tax sale.
- The trial court denied the Elmores’ motion for summary judgment, sustained Precept’s exception of no cause of action, granted Precept’s partial motion for summary judgment, and confirmed the tax sale; the Elmores appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Whether the City could delegate notice tasks to Archon | Elmores: City has a constitutional duty to give notice and may not delegate that duty to a private contractor | Precept: City may outsource particular tasks (like sending notices) so long as it does not outsource duties reserved exclusively to the tax collector | Court: Delegation to Archon of notice-sending was permissible here because City did not outsource statutorily or constitutionally exclusive functions; assignment fails |
| 2. Whether lack of pre-sale notice to Gina requires cancellation of the sale under La. R.S. 47:2153 and the Constitution | Elmores: R.S. 47:2153 and La. Const. art. VII §25 require pre-sale notice to record owners; absent actual pre-sale notice sale is null and must be canceled | Precept: Post-sale notice and statutory scheme (including redemption-nullity framework) operate to cure defective pre-sale notice; pre-sale defects are not absolute nullities | Court: Pre-sale notice defects do not automatically void a sale; Elmores’ remedy is limited to redemption-nullity analysis and here post-sale notices satisfied due process — assignment fails |
| 3. Whether post-sale notices and affidavits (Sledge/Alley) were insufficient to prove due process/due notice | Elmores: Sledge affidavit lacked personal knowledge and should be disallowed; therefore Precept did not prove due notice | Precept: Affidavits and documentary evidence show post-sale/redemption notices were mailed and no redemption occurred | Court: Because undisputed evidence showed timely post-sale/redemption notice to both Elmores, the court need not resolve the Sledge affidavit challenge; summary judgment for Precept affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. City of New Orleans, 144 So.3d 876 (La. 2014) (government tax collectors may not outsource statutorily exclusive tax-collection functions; outsourcing of ancillary tasks left open)
- Central Props. v. Fairway Gardenhomes, LLC, 225 So.3d 441 (La. 2017) (discusses due-process notice requirements and tax-sale title mechanics)
- Stow-Serge v. Side by Side Redevelopment, Inc., 302 So.3d 71 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2020) (post-sale/redemption notice can satisfy due-process notice requirements)
- Side by Side Redevelopment, Inc. v. Magee, 324 So.3d 688 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2021) (pre-sale notice defects do not automatically render a sale absolutely null; redemption-nullity framework controls)
- Alpha Capital US Bank v. White, 268 So.3d 1124 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2018) (recognizes that failure of pre-sale notice is not an absolute nullity)
- LPR, L.L.C. v. Naquin, 319 So.3d 369 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2021) (same: pre-sale notice defects are not per se absolute nullities)