Matter of 154-156 Long Beach Road, LLC v Jefferson
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
Real property tax lien redemption and due process notice prior to issuance of a tax deed under Nassau County Administrative Code § 5-51.0 [requires the lienholder, if the lien remains unsatisfied for 21 months, to give notice to redeem to the owner; for a nonresident owner, by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the last known address; provides that a certified mail receipt, return card, and affidavit are sufficient proof of service; and contains a savings clause that failure to give notice does not impair validity of the deed].
The Supreme Court, Nassau County granted the CPLR article 78 [special proceeding to challenge an administrative determination] petition, annulled the Treasurer’s approval of issuing a tax deed, and set aside the deed.
The Appellate Division reversed the Supreme Court’s judgment, denied the petition, and dismissed the proceeding, effectively reinstating the Treasurer’s approval and the tax deed.
Notice to redeem was reasonably calculated to apprise the owner under due process (Mullane/Jones v Flowers), despite the absence of returned green cards; mailings were sent to the property and a Brooklyn address, there was no evidence of non-delivery, the petitioner withdrew its claim that return receipts were not requested, and additional notice to the petitioner’s nonresident principal was not required on this record. Moreover, under Nassau County Administrative Code § 5-51.0(g), failure to give notice does not invalidate the deed, so the lack of return cards alone did not show the determination was affected by an error of law under CPLR 7803(3) [standard for Article 78 review: whether the determination was affected by an error of law].
Background
The petitioner owned real property in Nassau County. After a tax lien remained unsatisfied, lienholder Peter A. Pekich sought issuance of a tax deed. The Nassau County Treasurer approved issuance of the deed. The petitioner commenced a CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging the approval, arguing inadequate notice to redeem under Nassau County Administrative Code § 5-51.0 and a due process violation, including the absence of certified mail return cards and alleged need to notify the petitioner’s nonresident principal, Shmuel Schochet.
Lower Court Decision
The Supreme Court, Nassau County (Sher, J.) granted the petition, annulled the Treasurer’s determination approving issuance of the tax deed, and, in effect, set the tax deed aside.
Appellate Division Reversal
The Appellate Division dismissed as abandoned the separate appeal by the Treasurer and County because their brief sought no reversal. On Pekich’s appeal, the court reversed, holding that the mailings to the property address and a Brooklyn address satisfied due process; that actual receipt and production of return cards are not constitutionally required; that the record did not show Schochet’s interest was publicly recorded so as to require additional notice; and that § 5-51.0(g)’s savings clause meant the absence of return cards did not establish an error of law under CPLR 7803(3). The court denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding, awarding costs to Pekich.
Legal Significance
Confirms that, in Nassau County tax lien deed proceedings, due process is satisfied by notice reasonably calculated to reach the owner; actual receipt and physical return cards are not indispensable where certified mailings were sent and there is no evidence of non-delivery. The decision emphasizes the effect of Nassau County Administrative Code § 5-51.0(g)’s savings clause and clarifies that absent a public record establishing a principal’s property interest, additional notice to that principal is not required.
In Nassau County tax deed cases, proof of certified mailing to appropriate addresses can satisfy due process even without returned green cards, and the § 5-51.0(g) savings clause prevents technical notice defects from invalidating a tax deed absent evidence of non-delivery or other due process shortcomings.