 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
City of Detroit v. 19675 Hasse9/16/2003
FOR PUBLICATION
In these seventy-one consolidated appeals, we decide whether a statute of limitation bars plaintiff City of Detroit's actions to foreclose tax liens on several parcels of real property owned by defendant Acorn Investment Company for unpaid tax bills dating back as far as 1989. Because statutes of limitations do not run against the state or its subdivisions without an express Legislative enactment, and because the Legislature has not enacted a statute of limitation for in rem foreclosure actions, we hold that no statute of limitation barred the City's actions. We also conclude that the City was authorized to impose a late penalty fee because the ordinance empowering it to do so was enacted after December 31, 1982, as required by MCL 211.44(7). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's seventy-one foreclosure judgments, and also affirm the trial court's grant of summary disposition with respect to the penalty fees.
I. Basic Facts And Procedural History
A. The City's First Series Of Complaints
In May of 2001, the City filed thirty-nine nearly identical complaints each containing one count entitled "Real Property Tax Foreclosure ." The complaints described each of the involved parcels of real property, alleged that none of the various entities with ownership interests had paid general real estate taxes that the City levied on the properties, and averred that more than two years had passed since the City purchased "at the annual tax sale" "the unpaid tax liens of the City of Detroit for years prior to 1998 ." The City attached to each of the complaints tax bills showing unpaid taxes for each property, most dating back to 1991 or 1990, and one property having unpaid taxes as far back as 1989. According to the City, the unpaid liens now included amounts of interest, penalties, and court costs. The City requested that, 120 days after the filing date of the complaints, the trial court enter judgments of foreclosure with respect to the pre-1998 tax liens on the involved parcels pursuant to § 8-403 of the 1997 Detroit Charter, and "order the vesting in [the City] the absolute title in fee . . . in the subject propert " unless defendants paid the amounts of the judgment within sixty days after entry of the judgments. The City also sought possession of the premises.
B. The City's Second Series Of Complaints
In June of 2001, the City filed separate complaints with respect to thirty-two additional parcels of real property, each containing two counts. The first count, titled "Real Property TaX Foreclosure ," which consisted of allegations mirroring those within the sole count of the May 2001 complaints, sought a judgment of foreclosure of pre-1998 tax liens and possession of the involved parcels. Count II requested that the trial court impose on the owners of the involved properties personal liability for the delinquent real property taxes, pursuant to MCL 211.47 and Detroit Charter, § 8-403(B). The City again attached as an exhibit to each complaint the relevant real property tax bill showing unpaid city taxes, in some cases dating back to 1989. In September of 2001, the trial court consolidated all of the City's seventy-one actions.
C. Acorn's Motion And The City's Response
Shortly before the consolidation occurred, Acorn filed a "Motion for summary disposition and declaratory judgment, in part," pursuant to MCR 2.116(C)(10). While Acorn did not dispute the amounts of delinquent property taxes or the City's "ability to foreclose on real property in a suit to collect delinquent real property taxes," Acorn argued that a six-year period of limitation precluded the City from obtaining a judgment of foreclosure on
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Michigan Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|