Supreme Court rules for homeowner in 'equity theft' dispute

EvilEyeFleegle

Dogpatch USA
Gold Supporting Member
Nov 2, 2017
16,279
9,333
Looks like the court got one right:


The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled in favor of a 94-year-old woman over her claim that a Minnesota county violated the Constitution by keeping a $25,000 profit when it sold her home in a tax foreclosure sale.
The court concluded unanimously that Geraldine Tyler can pursue her argument that Hennepin County's decision to keep the surplus violated the takings clause of the Constitution’s Fifth Amendment, which requires that the government pay compensation when property is taken.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, in a reference to a passage from the Bible, that taxpayers are only required to pay the government what it is owed.

 
The state did not prove the $25,000 was just compensation.

SCOTUS said it was not.

The lower courts will follow that ruling.
 
You never really own your house.
You are renting it from the government.
And they will evict you if you don't pay them.
Some states have ridiculously high property taxes.

  1. New Jersey: 2.13%
  2. Illinois: 1.97%
  3. New Hampshire: 1.89%
  4. Vermont: 1.76%
  5. Connecticut: 1.73%
  6. Texas: 1.60%
  7. Nebraska: 1.54%
  8. Wisconsin: 1.53%
  9. Ohio: 1.52%
  10. Iowa: 1.43%
 
As unethical as the court has shown itself to be, I do find myself agreeing with the vast majority of it's rulings still.

9-0 ruling. What is sad is that there are people out there not understanding basic principles of the country that get 9-0 rulings in the Supreme Court.

To me it's not good enough that this lady may get to see her money returned, it would only be a good ruling if those who refused to do so lost their positions.

I do hate the court wasting people's time in rulings like this. They didn't rule the women should get her money back, just that she has the right to sue to get it back. So in the end the big winners here are the lawyers.
 
You never really own your house.
You are renting it from the government.
And they will evict you if you don't pay them.
Some states have ridiculously high property taxes.

  1. New Jersey: 2.13%
  2. Illinois: 1.97%
  3. New Hampshire: 1.89%
  4. Vermont: 1.76%
  5. Connecticut: 1.73%
  6. Texas: 1.60%
  7. Nebraska: 1.54%
  8. Wisconsin: 1.53%
  9. Ohio: 1.52%
  10. Iowa: 1.43%

The problem with property taxes is the local components can be quite the add on. Detroit has so many abandonned houses because of all the add-on fees that they bootstrap onto the property tax bills can push that effective cost up to like 9% per year so people just walked away. I inherited some property in WV that is like that. If you look at just the property tax rate it is fairly reasonable less than 1%, but then they add on school bonds, school operational costs, some tax related to something having to do with giving the county money to subsidize certain businesses, etc and the effective tax rate goes from something like 0.73 percent to somewhere just over 2%. It is all combined into a single bill so it isn't like you can evade a portion of it.
 
Looks like the court got one right:


The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled in favor of a 94-year-old woman over her claim that a Minnesota county violated the Constitution by keeping a $25,000 profit when it sold her home in a tax foreclosure sale.
The court concluded unanimously that Geraldine Tyler can pursue her argument that Hennepin County's decision to keep the surplus violated the takings clause of the Constitution’s Fifth Amendment, which requires that the government pay compensation when property is taken.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, in a reference to a passage from the Bible, that taxpayers are only required to pay the government what it is owed.
Good for her. Man, this is going to spark a lot of lawsuits. And, the funniest part is most of these things have happened in cities controlled by the dems.
 
Well, most all big cities are controlled by the dems and that is where this case happened. Even in Texas the big cities are controlled by Dems.
So one example condemns everyone. That is a hasty generalization.

hasty-generalization-fallacy-1690919-v7-CS-5b7c5d95c9e77c00253bfa9e.png
 
Well, you went from saying I have zero proof to acknowledging that in this case, I did. Now let's go a little further. Do you believe that most bigger cities are run by democrats?
Let's back up. One example is not any sort of conclusive proof. Do you have other examples like that of the grandmother? If you have quite a few in a specified time frame, then we can look at government by party. However, you do know the levi was by a county?
 
Last edited:
You never really own your house.
You are renting it from the government.
And they will evict you if you don't pay them.
Some states have ridiculously high property taxes.

  1. New Jersey: 2.13%
  2. Illinois: 1.97%
  3. New Hampshire: 1.89%
  4. Vermont: 1.76%
  5. Connecticut: 1.73%
  6. Texas: 1.60%
  7. Nebraska: 1.54%
  8. Wisconsin: 1.53%
  9. Ohio: 1.52%
  10. Iowa: 1.43%
You forgot Nassau County NY has the highest property taxes in the nation, followed by suffolk county,
 
Let's back up. One example is not any sort of conclusive proof. Do you have other examples like that of the grandmother? If you have quite a few in a specified time frame, then we can look at government by party. However, you do know the levi was by a county?
To be honest, the issue is not worth my time spending a couple of hours to research it. But, I think it is safe to say that in many cases this is happening in the bigger cities and the bigger cities are all run by Democrats. I would feel fairly safe making a small wager that I am correct.
 

Forum List

Back
Top