(logo) Attorneys' Title Guaranty Fund Inc.

Casenotes

Illinois

Municipalities; Tax Deeds

Strong v City of Peoria, 401 Ill App 3d 1096, 930 NE2d 561, 341 Ill Dec 351 (3rd D, 2010).

Facts:Todd Strong (Strong) purchased the real estate taxes for 2003, 2004, and 2005 for a certain property in Peoria, Illinois. After fulfilling the necessary legal requirements, between January and June, Strong was issued a tax deed by the circuit court in June 2007. In the meantime, the City of Peoria entered into an agreement with Nguyen Linh (Linh) the record owner of the property to demolish the house. Demolition took place on May 30, 2007.

In March 2008, Strong filed a complaint against Peoria for damages related to the destruction of the house, claiming that he was entitled to notice prior to the demolition. A city of Peoria code enforcement officer testified at bench trial that she had been aware that the real estate taxes had been bought by Strong when she contacted Linh about demolition. A real estate appraiser testified that the value of the property prior to the demolition had been $24,000 and that it was now $2,200. The trial court concluded that Strong was interested person who should have been notified before the demolition. It further decided that Strong's proper damages would be the amount he paid for the real estate taxes.

Strong appealed, contending that his proper damages are the difference between the value of the property before and after demolition. The City of Peoria cross-appealed, arguing that it owed Strong no notice at all, and that any damages were inappropriate as a result.

Holding:Affirmed. The appellate court found that the City of Peoria clearly had a duty to provide Strong with notice given that both the state tax lien statute, the Illinois Municipal Code, and the Peoria City Code all provided that a person with an interest, such as a tax lien, had to be notified before demolition.

The appellate court noted that damages to real property are only equal to the difference between the market value before and after demolition in cases where the complainant holds title to the property at the time of demolition. Strong did not receive title until June 2007, when the court issued the tax deed. The property was destroyed in May 2007. As such, the court reasoned, Strong was only entitled to compensatory damages that would restore him to the economic position he started in. Therefore, the appellate court agreed that Strong was only entitled to receive the amount he had paid to purchase the real estate taxes.

© ATG|Casenotes/Bulletin 1103_v4n2

[Last update: 3-3-11]