Wisner v. Vandelay Investments, L.L.C. (PFR)

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionPDF versionPDF version

Wisner v. Vandelay Investments, L.L.C. (PFR)

Case Number
S-16-0451
Call Date
February 9, 2018
Case Time
9:00 AM
Court Number
Lincoln
Case Location
Lincoln
Case Summary

S-16-0451 Estate of Gladys P.Wisner, Deceased, By and Through her Power of Attorney, Robin J. Wisner (Appellant) v. Vandelay Investments, L.L.C., a Nebraska Limited Liability Company, and All Other Persons Having or Claiming and Interest in and to the North Half (N1/2) and the North Half of the South Half (N1/2 S1/2) of Section Twenty-Nine (29), Township Thirteen (13) North, Range Twenty-Nine (29) West of the 6th P.M., in Lincoln County, Nebraska, Real Names Unknown

Lincoln County District Court, Judge Richard A. Birch

Attorneys: David Pederson (Pederson & Troshynski) (Appellant) --- Robert S. Lannin & Chris S. Schmidt (Baylor Evnen Curtiss Grimit & Witt, LLP)

Civil: Real property; Treasurer’s tax deed; notice

Proceedings below: The district court quieted title in favor of Appellees.  On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the case.  Appellees filed a Petition for Further Review which was granted by the Nebraska Supreme Court.

Issues on Review: 1) The Court of Appeals erred in interpreting Neb. Rev. Stat. § 77-1834, as applied to the facts of this case, as not allowing service of notice by publication since Gladys Wisner's whereabouts were supposedly "known", and erred in finding evidence supported a determination that Vandelay representatives "knew" her whereabouts.

2. The Court of Appeals erred in not equating the language of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 77-1834 involving a person being "found" as the equivalent of being "served" in terms of notice by certified mail and subsequent publication.  3. The Court of Appeals, without referencing any rules of statutory construction or engaging in any analysis whatsoever, erred in invalidating Vandelay's treasurer's tax deed and determining that Appellant was entitled to redeem the real property based on Vandelay's supposed failure to comply with notice requirements.  4. The Court of Appeals erred in failing to acknowledge Vandelay's "best practice" of mailing a copy of the notice sent, first class mail, postage prepaid, to Gladys' address of record, which was not returned, as accomplishing service, as set forth by the United States Supreme Court in Jones v. Flowers, 547 U.S. 220 (2006).  5. Appellant lacked standing to challenge the treasurer's tax deed due to failure to satisfy a condition precedent under Neb. Rev. Stat. $ 77-1844 by showing payment of taxes or tender of payment to the county treasurer as required by Neb. Rev. Stat. S 77-1824.

Schedule Code
SC