The Carmen Nancy Rodriguez Story

Tallage Bought Nancy’s Tax Title

Worcester woman sees hope in tax lien fight after SCOTUS ruling

Tallage Foreclosed and Tried to Evict Nancy

She lost her home over $2600 in back taxes how a landmark court case could give it back

In this case, Nancy lost title to her home and had to file a bankruptcy case. Under bankruptcy law, where a person loses an asset because of fraud, they are entitled to get it back. One type of fraud can be established if the company that takes the asset fails to pay “reasonably equivalent value.” Here, Nancy argues that her home was transferred to Tallage for a payment of approximately $3,700 — far from fair value.

On March 15, Chief Judge Elizabeth Katz of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for Massachusetts denied a Tallage motion that would have allowed the company to evict Nancy from her decades-long home. – Telegram & Gazette

Then Tyler Dropped May 25th and Tallage Moved to Vacate June 29th

To allow Ms. Rodriguez to proceed with reorganization under the spirit of the Bankruptcy Code, Tallage Davis now requests that the Land Court vacate the Judgment of foreclosure, so that the Property may be administered under the Bankruptcy Code as part of the Bankruptcy Estate. The Bankruptcy Court has, today, issued an order allowing Tallage Davis to proceed with a request to Vacate the Judgment. See Order in Chapter 13 Case No. 23-40040 dated June 29, 2023 – Motion to Vacate

Worcester is Taking the Tyler Case Seriously:

August 22, 2023 the Worcester City Council

ORDERED:

Request City Manager request City Solicitor provide City Council with an opinion as to whether or not the recent Supreme Court decision in Tyler v. Hennepin County, Minnesota obligates the City of Worcester to cease its tax title auction/foreclosure process, and if not, for a report as to what options, including a Home Rule Petition, exist to consider accomplishing same. (Bergman) 12b.

Request City Manager provide City Council with a report concerning the policies and procedures followed by the city as they relate to using M.G.L. Chapter 60 to recoup unpaid property taxes from homeowners. Said report should include information as to what and how much money being owed triggers actions including notice to the property owner, how the city works with the family and ultimately the sale of the property. Further, request City Manager include in said report a breakdown of which companies and/or individuals have purchased properties sold to recoup unpaid property taxes in the last ten (10) years. (King) 12c.

That City Council convene in Executive Session at its next meeting for the purpose of discussing litigation strategy with respect to the case of Carmen N. Rodriguez v. Timothy J. McGourthy, City Treasurer of the City of Worcester, the City of Worcester, Massachusetts, and Tallage-Davis, LLC United States Bankruptcy Court, District of Massachusetts, Case No. 23-04017. (King)

Illegal Taking – “Massachusetts Has a Problem: the Unconstitutionality of the Tax Deed”

PLF Logo

Local governments have perverse incentives to steal your property.

Several of our sister States have determined that excess value from a tax taking must be made available to the taxpayer as a matter of constitutional law. See, e.g., Thomas Tool Servs., Inc. v. Croydon, 145 N.H. 218, 220, 761 A.2d 439 (2000) (tax lien procedure resulting in equity windfall to purchaser of tax deed violated takings clause of New Hampshire Constitution); Bogie v. Barnet, 129 Vt. 46, 55, 270 A.2d 898 (1970) (retention of excess value by town amounts to unlawful taking for public use without compensation contrary to Vermont Constitution).

Ending Home Equity Theft | Pacific Legal Foundation

Foss I

Foss II

Mucciaccio

 

TOWN MEETING WARRANT

The Meeting Warrant is available on line (you will get a paper copy next week in your USPS mailbox)

Click to access 2023_atm_warrant_final.pdf

Doug will be holding a discussion of the articles April 24 in the Houghton Building I assume it will be at 7pm. (good luck trying to find an anoucement about it on the town’s website)

Article 13 is the citizens petition

Stop Home Equity Theft

SCOTUS will hear the issue on the 26th

Tyler v. Hennepin County, Minnesota

Since only 5 people came out on Monday click below if you’d like to see the Candidates Night

Summit Series

No. Name of Hill Conservation Area Start Description
1 Watttaquadock Hill* Welch Pond Welch Pond Trail Head, Wattaquadock Hill Rd.
2 North Peak Vaughn Hills Moen Parking Area, Vaughn Hill Rd.
3 Peach Hill** Fyfeshire Fyfeshire Gate, Wattaquadock Hill Rd.
4 Powder House Hill Powder House Town Common, Main St.
5 Rattlesnake Hill Rattlesnake Lime Kiln Trail Head, Main St.
6 Barrett’s Hill Danforth Danforth Trail Head, Danforth Ln.
7 Long Hill*** Annie Moore Annie Moore Trailhead, Bolton Woods Way

Click to access SummitSeries_Guide.pdf

Continue reading “Summit Series”

6th Circuit Opinion

The government may not decline to recognize long-established interests in property as a device to take them. That was the effect of the Michigan Act as applied to the plaintiffs here; and we agree with the plaintiffs that, on the facts alleged here, the County took their property without just compensation. We therefore reverse the district court’s dismissal of their claim against the County under the Takings Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

The Magna Charta itself had provided that a debtor’s lands could be taken only to the extent necessary to satisfy the debt. Magna Charta ¶ 26 (1215); see also Den ex dem. Murray v. Hoboken Land & Imp. Co., 59 U.S. 272, 277 (1855).

In an 1808 case, for example, Chief Justice Marshall held that a tax collector had “unquestionably exceeded his authority” when he had sold more land than “necessary to pay the tax in arrear.” Stead’s Ex’rs v. Course, 8 U.S. 403, 414 (1808); see also, e.g., Margraff v. Cunningham’s Heirs, 57 Md. 585, 588 (1882) (tax collector’s “duty is to sell no more than is reasonably sufficient to pay the taxes and charges thereon, when a division is practicable without injury”); Loomis v. Pingree, 43 Me. 299, 311 (Me. 1857) (applying the same rule); Martin v. Snowden, 59 Va. 100, 118–19, 139 (1868) (same).

“According to the long-settled rules of law and equity in all the states whose jurisprudence has been modelled upon the common law,” the Court wrote, “legal title to the premises in question vested” in the creditor upon the debtor’s default; yet the landowner still held “equitable title” to the property. Bronson v. Kinzie, 42 U.S. 311, 318 (1843)

Hall v. Meisner

Lehto Commentary