Zinvest v. Msla Cty Treasurer, 2017 MT 188N

Zinvest purchased tax liens on Van Ostrand's Missoula County property after 2009–2010 taxes became delinquent; County assigned the liens to Zinvest.
Zinvest sent a statutory form Notice (per §15-18-215, MCA) on June 7, 2013 stating redemption deadline "on or prior to August 13, or on or prior to the date on which the County Treasurer will otherwise issue a tax deed."
Zinvest attempted to initiate issuance of a tax deed in mid‑August by sending blank checks (arrived Aug. 16) and calling the County Treasurer; no tax deed had been issued yet.
Van Ostrand’s counsel contacted the Treasurer Aug. 14 to redeem by credit card; Treasurer received the message Aug. 15, and Van Ostrand paid and a Certificate of Redemption was recorded.
Zinvest sued the Treasurer (and Van Ostrand) claiming improper redemption after the 60‑day notice period; the District Court granted summary judgment for Treasurer and Van Ostrand, and the Supreme Court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether redemption after the 60‑day notice period was improper	Zinvest: Treasurer could not accept redemption after the statutory 60‑day notice expired and thus improperly allowed redemption	Treasurer/Van Ostrand: Zinvest’s Notice expressly allowed redemption until the Treasurer issued a tax deed; no deed had been issued, so redemption was timely	Court: Held redemption valid — Notice gave owner additional time until tax deed issuance; no deed had issued before payment
Whether Zinvest is entitled to damages for improper redemption	Zinvest: seeks damages for losing right to obtain tax deed	Defendants: no improper act; redemption complied with Notice and statutes; Zinvest already has statutory interest as compensation	Court: Denied damages; statutory 10% interest compensates lien purchaser
Whether strict compliance with notice requirements was met	Zinvest: contends statutory notice period controlled and was exceeded	Defendants: Notice used statutory form and provided extended redemption period; procedure complied	Court: Emphasized strict compliance requirement but found Notice controlled and was complied with; redemption permitted
Whether attorney fees should be awarded	Zinvest: likely sought fees	Defendants: opposed	Court: Declined to award attorney fees

Showell v. Brosten, 189 P.3d 1210 (Mont. 2008) (tax‑deed issuance requires strict compliance with statutory notice)
Pilgeram v. GreenPoint Mortgage Funding, Inc., 313 P.3d 839 (Mont. 2013) (standard of review for summary judgment and review of legal conclusions)