State Supreme Court Court Rules Against County's Scheme of Taking Property to Settle Tax Debt

Judge Cites Magna Carta in Ruling Against County

On July 17, 2020- the beginning of the plandemic, when courts and other public properties were unlawfully closed to the public, and governors like Michigan’s went to the draconian extent of even banning the selling of seeds- the Michigan Supreme Court (A.K.A. “Supreme Court of Michigan” or “SCOMI”) surprisingly ruled in favor or property rights. In RAFAELI, LLC v OAKLAND COUNTY, the court found that it is unconstitutional for local governments throughout the state to take property for unpaid property taxes, sell it, and keep the proceeds above and beyond the tax owed.

Though the case is, technically, only precedential for Michigan, those who read the case from a constitutional perspective will learn the following:

1. When a property owner, who has no obligation to statutory rules, establishes a property right under the common law, tax collectors can only seize property to satisfy the value of the debt, leaving the property owner with the excess, for the Magna Carta protects property owners from uncompensated takings.

2. The Magna Carta (the “Great Charter” of 1215), which is the cornerstone of the American Constitution, can legitimately be cited in support of other types of legal challenges where federal and local governments have committed unconstitutional actions, for SCOMI itself, in support of its judgement, cited from this fundamental contract in which the roots of organic law that governs America are deeply fixed.

3. The plaintiffs’ arguments- as affirmed by a 6-to-1 decision of the justice- can be used in other states to challenge this widespread practice of unconstitutional takings; this is particularly true for plaintiffs in states that include the Magna Carta among their foundational documents¹.

4. Those in Michigan who have lost their properties to this scheme can sue the county culprits, for the General Property Tax Act (GPTA), MCL 211.1 et seq., is unconstitutional, according to SCOMI.

5. Plaintiffs who lose in lower courts can win in their state Supreme Court if they remain persistent in the fight to protect their God-given rights.

This case was the culmination of a battle which arose from a property tax debt of $8.41 owed by Rafaeli in 2011 (which grew to $285.81 by way of interest, penalties, and fees) , and $6,000 owed by Andre Ohanessian, including unpaid taxes, interest, penalties, and fees. Oakland County, MI, took Rafaeli’s property and sold it for $24,500. Similarly, the County foreclosed on Ohanessian’s property and sold it at auction for $82,000. All proceeds were kept by Oakland County; the excess cash was not returned to either plaintiff.

Rafaeli and Ohanessian brought an action in the Oakland Circuit Court against the County and its treasurer, Andrew Meisner, alleging an unconstitutional taking of their properties, as well as Due Process and Equal Protection violations. After being defeated in District Court bt judge J. Denise K. Langford-Morris (yes, this is just one person), Rafaeli and Ohanessian contested the improper ruling in the Court of Appeals. That court, in an unpublished per curiam opinion issued on October 24, 2017 (Docket No. 330696), held that defendants acquired their interest in plaintiffs’ properties by way of a statutory scheme that did not violate due process. Rafaeli and Ohanessian then brought the injustice to the Michigan Supreme Court, which held that:

1. Defendant’s retention of the surplus proceeds was an unconstitutional taking;

2. Defendants cannot rely on the taxing power to justify their retention of the surplus proceeds;

3. Just compensation is equal to the amount of surplus proceeds generated from the tax-foreclosure sale.

According to the syllabus prepared by the Reporter of Decisions, the SCOMI justices based their decision in favor of the plaintiffs, in large part, upon the Magna Carta. For example;

“The Magna Carta protected property owners from uncompensated takings and recognized that tax collectors could only seize property to satisfy the value of the debt payable to the Crown, leaving the property owner with the excess.”

The court then concluded in its 2020 decision that,

“We hold that plaintiffs, former property owners whose properties were foreclosed and sold to satisfy delinquent real-property taxes, have a cognizable, vested property right to the surplus proceeds resulting from the tax-foreclosure sale of their properties. This right continued to exist even after fee simple title to plaintiffs’ properties vested with defendants, and therefore, defendants’ retention and subsequent transfer of those proceeds into the county general fund amounted to a taking of plaintiffs’ properties under Article 10, § 2 of our 1963 Constitution. Therefore, plaintiffs are entitled to just compensation, which in the context of a tax-foreclosure sale is commonly understood as the surplus proceeds. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand this case to the Oakland Circuit Court for proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Thus those whose homes and investment properties have been foreclosed and sold to satisfy a property tax debt- particularly owners whose properties were in expensive property states like California and New York- should find encouragement and empowerment to sue their county tyrants for unconstitutional takings (theft). Likewise, those whose businesses were shut-down or destroyed by the county using the plandemic as justification should bring legal action against the health officers and county attorneys who perpetrated the scheme if just compensation was never provided to those who lost property (wages, income, business, real property, etc.) as a result of the “mandates”. If you are in such a position and need assistance, you are invited to contact help@passagetoliberty.com. Passage To Liberty provides strategy, research, document preparation, filing, process of service, testimony, training, and other services for pro per litigants and and people seeking to end tyranny.

1. California is one such state whose foundational documents include the Magna Carta.