Rhode Island General Laws

R.I. Gen. Laws § 44-9-11 (2026)

Notice to mortgagees and other parties in interest

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section RI-LEGwebserver.rilegislature.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) In case the collector shall advertise for sale any property, real, personal, or mixed, in which any person other than the person to whom the tax is assessed has an interest, it shall not be necessary for the collector to notify the interested party, except for the following interested parties, provided that their interest was of record at least ninety (90) days prior to the date set for the sale: the present owner of record; mortgagees of record and mortgage assignees of record; former fee holders whose right to redeem has not been foreclosed; holders of tax title; federal agencies having a recorded lien on the subject property; holders of life estates of record and vested remainder, whose identity can be ascertained from an examination of the land or probate records of the municipality conducting the sale; and/or their assignees of record who shall be notified by the collector, either by registered or certified mail sent postpaid not less than twenty (20) days before the date of sale or any adjournment of the sale to an agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive service of process; or to the address of the party in interest set forth in the recorded mortgage document or the recorded assignment; or to the last known address of the party in interest; but no notice of adjournments shall be necessary other than the announcement made at the sale. The posting and publication of the notice of the time and place of sale in the manner provided by § 44-9-9 shall be deemed sufficient notice to all other interested parties. This provision shall apply to all taxes levied prior to and subsequent to 1896. This provision shall be subject to the notice requirements of § 44-9-10. It shall not be necessary, however, to provide the names of the mortgagees and other parties in interest under this section to the Rhode Island Housing and Mortgage Finance Corporation or to the office of healthy aging. In the event that the Rhode Island Housing and Mortgage Finance Corporation does in fact pay the tax and acquire a lien on the subject property, then the Rhode Island Housing and Mortgage Finance Corporation shall, within ninety (90) days of making the tax payment, notify those mortgagees of record and mortgagee assignees of record whose interests in the property was of record at least ninety (90) days prior to the date set for the tax sale as identified in the recorded collector’s deed of the fact that the taxes have been paid by the Rhode Island Housing and Mortgage Finance Corporation and that a tax lien has been acquired by the Rhode Island Housing and Mortgage Finance Corporation.

(b) Only a person or entity failing to receive notice in accordance with the provisions of this section and §§ 44-9-9 and 44-9-10 shall be entitled to raise the issue of lack of notice or defective notice to void the tax sale. The right to notice shall be personal to each party entitled to it and shall not be asserted on behalf of another party in interest. If there is a defect in notice, the tax sale shall be void only as to the party deprived of adequate notice, but shall be valid as to all other parties in interest who received proper notice of the tax sale.

(c) Once a petition is filed under § 44-9-25, and any party in interest entitled to notice of the tax sale receives actual notice of the pendency of the petition to foreclose, the party must raise the notice defense in accordance with the provisions of § 44-9-31 or be estopped from alleging lack of notice in any action to vacate a final decree entered in accordance with § 44-9-30.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1979–2020 · leading case: Kildeer Realty v. Brewster Realty Corp., 826 A.2d 961 (R.I. 2003).
Kildeer Realty v. Brewster Realty Corp., 826 A.2d 961 (R.I. 2003). · cites it 10× “In accordance with the existing statutory mandate set forth then in G.L.1956 § 44-9-11, 3 to notify all mortgagees of rec *963 ord before a tax sale, the city was required to notify several interested parties in the property’s more recent chain of title.”
140 Reservoir Avenue Assocs. v. Sepe Investments, LLC, 941 A.2d 805 (R.I. 2007). · cites it 9× “» 6 *809 According to the city, it was required to send certified notice under § 44-9-10 only to Arnold Kilberg, the record owner as of December 81, 2002; the city further contends that, because Joan Kilberg acquired her interest after December 31, 2002, the notice to which she…”
Robert P. Quinn Trust v. Ruiz, 723 A.2d 1127 (R.I. 1999). · cites it 8× “That judgment declared void the city’s tax sale of certain property, on the ground that G.L.1956 § 44-9-11 violated the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution.”
Burns v. Conley, 526 F. Supp. 2d 235 (D.R.I. 2007). · cites it 4× “2d at 1129 (declaring § 44-9-11 to be unconstitutional because it “does not provide for mail or personal notice to [ ] readily identifiable interested parties”).”
Ashness v. Tomasetti, 643 A.2d 802 (R.I. 1994). · cites it 4× “Section 44-9-11 requires that the tax collector notify mortgagees of record of an upcoming tax sale by one of those three notice methods; with respect to other interested parties, however, that section deems sufficient the notice provided for in § 44-9-9.”
Harvey Realty v. Killingly Manor Condo. Assoc., 787 A.2d 465 (R.I. 2001). · cites it 2× “At the time of the tax sale, § 44-9-11 regulated interested party notice.”
Norwest Mortg., Inc. v. Masse, 799 A.2d 259 (R.I. 2002). · cites it 2× “They also insist that the limitations period for voiding post-petition tax-title transfers has expired and only the bankruptcy court has original and exclusive jurisdiction over Norwest’s claim.”
First Bank & Trust Co. v. City of Providence, 827 A.2d 606 (R.I. 2003). · cites it 4× “In addition, on March 28, 2000, pursuant to § 44-9-11, the city notified the mortgagee, First Bank, that it would be selling the property for nonpayment of taxes for tax years 1995 through 1999.”
Picerne v. Sylvestre, 404 A.2d 476 (R.I. 1979). “General Laws 1956 (1970 Reenactment) §44-9-11 requires the collector to give notice of the sale to mortgagees of record.”
Finnegan v. Seaside Realty Trust, 777 A.2d 548 (R.I. 2001). · cites it 2× “After hearing the arguments of counsel on May 14, 2001, and after examining the memoranda filed by them, we conclude that no cause has been revealed that would persuade us not to decide the case at this time.”
Kim v. Jordan Realty (D.R.I. 2020). · cites it 32× “2 The constitutionally challenged subsection of R.I. Gen. Laws § 44-9-11 provides as follows: Once a petition [for foreclosure of redemption] is filed under § 44-9-25, and any party in interest entitled to notice of the tax sale receives actual notice of the pendency of the…”
Mortg. Elec. Reg. Sys., Inc. v. Verissimo DePina, 63 A.3d 871 (R.I. 2013). “We agree with the hearing justice that the original tax deed purported to convey Lot 486, and that the corrective deed, relating to an entirely different parcel of land, Lot 456, was null and void because it was not recorded within sixty days of the tax sale as required by §…”
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 44-9-11(a) — 2 cases
140 Reservoir Avenue Assocs. v. Sepe Investments, LLC, 941 A.2d 805 (R.I. 2007). “» 6 *809 According to the city, it was required to send certified notice under § 44-9-10 only to Arnold Kilberg, the record owner as of December 81, 2002; the city further contends that, because Joan Kilberg acquired her interest after December 31, 2002, the notice to which she…”
Kim v. Jordan Realty (D.R.I. 2020). “2 The constitutionally challenged subsection of R.I. Gen. Laws § 44-9-11 provides as follows: Once a petition [for foreclosure of redemption] is filed under § 44-9-25, and any party in interest entitled to notice of the tax sale receives actual notice of the pendency of the…”
— R.I. Gen. Laws § 44-9-11(c) — 2 cases
Burns v. Conley, 526 F. Supp. 2d 235 (D.R.I. 2007). “2d at 1129 (declaring § 44-9-11 to be unconstitutional because it “does not provide for mail or personal notice to [ ] readily identifiable interested parties”).”
Kim v. Jordan Realty (D.R.I. 2020). “2 The constitutionally challenged subsection of R.I. Gen. Laws § 44-9-11 provides as follows: Once a petition [for foreclosure of redemption] is filed under § 44-9-25, and any party in interest entitled to notice of the tax sale receives actual notice of the pendency of the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.