Vosilla v. Rosado (2006)

A tax deed sale, like the name suggests, is where a deed “is issued to the highest bidder on property sold at a public auction because of nonpayment of ad valorem taxes.” Vosilla v. Rosado, 944 So. 2d 289, 292 (Fla. 2006); Fla. Stat. § 197.542 (1)–(2).

See Rosado, 944 So. 2d at 300 (“Both the tax collector and the clerk of court received the change of address letters sent to them by the Rosados.”); Patricia, 974 So. 2d at 563 (“Here, Weingarten likewise provided notice of its new address to the authorities.”).

The third party filed suit against the owners to quiet title to the property.113 The owners argued that the clerk 108 944 So. 2d 289, 291 (Fla. 2006). 109 Id. at 291 . 110 Id. 111 Id. at 292 . 112 Id. 113 Id. of court’s notice was not reasonably calculated under all the circumstances to apprise them of the tax deed sale because, despite the owners’ having notified both the tax collector and clerk of court of their new address, the clerk of court sent the notice of the tax de…

“Determining whether a particular method of notice is ‘reasonably calculated’ to provide adequate notice requires ‘due regard for the practicalities and peculiarities of the case.’” Vosilla v. Rosado, 944 So. 2d 289, 294 (Fla. 2006) (quoting Mullane v. Cent.

Mgmt. v. Profile Invs., Inc., 87 So.3d 765, 771 (Fla.2012); Vosilla v. Rosado, 944 So.2d 289, 299 (Fla.2006). “[T]hose reasonable steps depend on the particular circumstances of the case and may include: checking the records of the taxing authorities for a change of address submitted by the legal titleholder; resending notice by regular mail so that no signature is required; posting notice on the property to be sold, not merely at the last known address of the titleholder; o…

The Fifth District determined that the notice did not satisfy due process because it “was not reasonably calculated to apprise the Rosados of the impending tax deed sale where the tax collector knew or should have known that the address listed on the tax [assessment] roll was incorrect.” Id. at 292-93 (alteration in original) (quoting Rosado v. Vosilla, 909 So.2d 505, 511 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)).

Mgmt., Inc. v. Profile Invs., Inc., 875 So.2d 443, 447-48 (Fla.2004) (citing Dawson v. Saada, 608 So.2d 806 (Fla.1992), and stating that the requirement that all property owners know of and pay delinquent and current taxes does not relieve the State of its obligation to give adequate notice of a pending tax sale and that no valid tax deed may be issued without complying with statutory notice requirements); Vosilla v. Rosado, 944 So.2d 289, 294 (Fla.2006) ("The Due Process Cl…

Vosilla v. Rosado, 944 So.2d at 289, 291 (Fla.2006).

In Vosilla v. Rosado, 944 So.2d 289, 291 (Fla.2006), the Florida Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether notice to a property owner of a pending tax deed sale that complies with section 197.522(1) can nonetheless violate constitutional due process when the notice is not reasonably calculated to apprise the owners of the tax deed sale.

In Vosilla v. Rosado, 944 So.2d 289, 291 (Fla.2006), the Florida Supreme Court recently resolved a certified conflict issue: whether notice to a property owner of a pending tax deed sale that complies with section 197.522(1) can nonetheless violate due process of law if the notice is not reasonably calculated to apprise the owners of the tax deed sale.

See Vosilla v. Rosado, 944 So.2d 289, 294 (Fla.2006) (holding that to satisfy due process, any notiee given must be reasonably calculated, under all circumstances, to apprise interested parties of pendency of action and afford them opportunity to present objections); Heritage Casket & Vault Ind., Inc. v. Sunshine Bank, 428 So.2d 341, 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).

See Rosado v. Vosilla, 909 So.2d 505 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (citing Kidder v. Cirelli, 821 So.2d 1106 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), which holds that a property owner who fails to provide his correct address change has no right to complain of lack of notice of the sale of his property for nonpayment of taxes), aff'd, 944 So.2d 289 (Fla.2006). .

See Vosilla, 944 So.2d at 291 .

See Vosilla v. Rosado, 944 So.2d 289 (Fla.2006) (“Due process requires that the clerk look beyond the tax collector’s statement when there is reason to believe that the statement no longer reflects those who are entitled to notice ....”)

Compare Rosado v. Vosilla, 909 So.2d 505 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005), affirmed, 944 So.2d 289 (Fla.2006)(relief granted where the failure of the owners of real property to receive the notice of sale was entirely the fault of the taxing agencies).