Reynolds v. Hoke, 702 S.E.2d 629

Property in Monroe County originally titled to Bill and Rose Reynolds; delinquent 2005 taxes led to sheriff’s sale to Hoke in 2006 for $3,000 and certificate listing Reynolds and Beverly Haynes as taxpayers.
Appellee filed for a tax deed in 2007; clerk published notice to redeem addressed to Bill and Rose Reynolds and to Beverly Haynes; Haynes accepted notice by certified mail.
Property not redeemed; Monroe County issued a tax deed to Hoke in April 2008; appellants sought to set aside the deed in June 2008, alleging lack of notice and improper title search.
Appellants held a quitclaim deed conveying the property to them from Beverly Haynes, recorded June 7, 2006, four-and-a-half months before the sheriff’s sale.
Circuit Court granted summary judgment for appellee in July 2009, holding appellants failed to show lack of reasonable diligence in notice; court emphasized no indexing aiding identification of appellants.
This Court reversed, holding appellee’s notice duties were not satisfied because Haynes appeared as a taxpayer and appellee failed to search for deeds indexed under Haynes, thereby not providing reasonable diligence under W. Va. Code § 11A-4-4(b).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Hoke exercised reasonable diligence to provide notice to appellants.	Reynolds argues appellee failed to locate Haynes deed and appellants’ interest due to inadequate title search.	Hoke contends he mailed notices to record owners and complied with statutory requirements and list publication.	No; appellee failed to search for Haynes deeds, failing reasonable diligence.

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. UP Ventures, II, 223 W.Va. 407 (2009) (notice duties under 11A-3-19(a); no obligation to add parties post-Dec 31)
Painter v. Peavy, 192 W.Va. 189 (1994) (summary judgment standard on de novo review)
Williams v. Precision Coil, Inc., 194 W.Va. 52 (1995) (summary judgment standard and evidence considerations)