Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Constitutionality of Tax Sale Practices Questioned By NY’s Second Department
When a village or other taxing authority conducts a tax lien sale, and the purchaser of the tax lien subsequently acquires a tax deed, what rights does the tax-delinquent former owner of the property enjoy? That issue recently faced New York’s Second Department in County Acquisitions, LLC v. Lanser, 2025 WL 542045, and the court remitted for consideration of the constitutional takings issue raised by the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Tyler v. Hennepin County, 598 U.S. 631 (2023). The Tyler case has led the New York legislature to make changes to New York’s procedures with respect to delinquent tax liens, but the statutory amendments do not, by their terms, apply to tax deeds like the one at issue in Lanser.
The Lanser Case
The property at issue in Lanser is in the Village of Rockville Center, which had adopted a local law authorizing it to continue tax lien sales in accordance with former title 3 of article 14 of the Real Property Tax Law. When the property’s owner defaulted on its real estate taxes, the village held a public auction of a tax lien, and a purchaser obtained a tax lien certificate. More than two years after purchasing the tax lien, the purchaser served a notice of redemption on the former owner, who failed to redeem within the statutory six-month period. The village then entered a treasurer’s deed to the tax lien purchaser, who recorded the deed and then brought an action to quiet title. The Supreme Court initially granted summary judgment to purchaser, provided that former owner failed to redeem within 90 days. Purchaser moved to reargue the conditional nature of the order granting former owner additional time, but Supreme Court responded by denying the purchaser’s summary judgment motion. Purchaser appealed.
The Appellate Division modified, holding first that the tax lien purchaser had complied with the relevant statutory procedures and was entitled to summary judgment under then-applicable New York law. But the court noted that after Supreme Court’s decision in the case, the United States Supreme Court decided Tyler v. Hennepin County, 598 US 631, invalidating certain tax sale practices. The court remitted for consideration of the constitutional taking claim after proper notice to the village and the state attorney general.
Tyler v. Hennepin County
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?