Michigan Supreme Court – Money back for former homeowners

In a landmark decision, the Michigan Supreme Court has ruled that counties cannot retain surplus proceeds from tax-foreclosed property sales, a move poised to return millions to former homeowners. This ruling, stemming from the case Rafaeli, LLC v. Oakland County, found that keeping surplus auction proceeds violated the Michigan Constitution’s Takings Clause, which prohibits the government from seizing private property without just compensation.

Typical Government Hustle

Historically, Michigan’s tax foreclosure law, established in 1999, allowed counties to auction off properties with unpaid taxes and retain any proceeds beyond the owed taxes and associated fees.

This practice led to significant financial windfalls for counties, often at the expense of the original property owners, who lost their homes and any equity built up in them.

The Supreme Court’s decision overturns this precedent, emphasizing that former homeowners are entitled to any surplus funds from these sales.

The Michigan Supreme Court ruled that practice as unconstitutional and said the homeowner was entitled to that surplus.

At the time of the ruling, only claims from 2020 and later qualified for reimbursement of funds, but a new ruling Monday could impact sales as far back as 2014. 

Attorney Michael Komorn

Attorney Michael Komorn

State / Federal Legal Defense

With extensive experience in criminal legal defense since 1993 from pre-arrest, District, Circuit, Appeals, Supreme and the Federal court systems.

KOMORN LAW (248) 357-2550

The case that catalyzed this ruling involved Uri Rafaeli, whose property in Oakland County was sold for $24,500 after he failed to pay a $285 property tax debt. 

The county kept the entire sale amount, far exceeding the owed tax. The court ruled this action as an unconstitutional taking, highlighting the inequity of the practice.

This decision has significant financial implications for Michigan counties.

Many counties relied on surplus proceeds from tax foreclosure auctions to supplement their budgets and support various county operations.

Wayne County, for instance, often used these funds to cover budget deficits. Now, counties may face financial strain, particularly if the ruling is applied retroactively, necessitating repayments for past surpluses retained from property sales prior to the 2020 decision.

In response to the ruling, Oakland County and others will need to amend their practices. Oakland County has already settled a related lawsuit, establishing a $38 million fund to compensate affected homeowners. This settlement underscores the potential scale of financial restitution that counties might need to provide.

Like every other poor decision the government makes it will be funded by tax payers.

The ruling aligns Michigan with other states that ensure surplus proceeds from tax sales are returned to former property owners, reinforcing property rights and equitable treatment. Moving forward, Michigan counties will need to adjust their tax foreclosure processes to comply with this ruling, likely influencing legislative changes to solidify the new legal framework.

For former homeowners, this ruling represents a significant victory, affirming their rights to any equity remaining in their properties after tax debts are settled. It also serves as a check on governmental overreach, ensuring that property seizure for unpaid taxes does not result in unjust enrichment at the expense of taxpayers.

This decision has broader implications beyond Michigan, resonating with similar cases across the United States. Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with a Minnesota homeowner in a comparable situation, emphasizing a national trend towards protecting homeowners from losing their property equity in tax foreclosure processes.

Conclusion

The Michigan Supreme Court’s ruling mandates a fairer approach to tax foreclosures, ensuring surplus proceeds return to the rightful owners and setting a precedent for property rights protections. This decision will reshape county financial strategies and bolster homeowner protections, marking a pivotal shift in Michigan’s handling of tax-delinquent properties​

Legal Counsel and Your Rights

When facing legal challenges, particularly in criminal cases, it is advisable to seek legal counsel immediately.

An experienced attorney can provide guidance on how to navigate interactions with law enforcement while safeguarding your constitutional rights.

Since 1993 our expert legal defense in navigating criminal law matters and protecting your constitutional rights are what we eat for breakfast everyday.

Contact Komorn Law PLLC if you’re ready to fight and win.

Research us and then call us.

More Rights You Should Know

Other Articles

How to create and share a Dropbox link

How to create and share a Dropbox link

Simplified Sender and Receiver Dropbox Share Instructions to Someone NOT on your Team. Don't get caught up in another license or give access to your whole box by mistake.Dropbox Sender Share Instructions Log into your Dropbox account Hover over the file or folder...

read more
Smell of marijuana no longer legal grounds for search

Smell of marijuana no longer legal grounds for search

The Michigan Supreme Court has ruled that the smell of marijuana alone is no longer sufficient probable cause for police to conduct a warrantless search of a vehicle. This decision overturns a previous precedent where the odor of marijuana was considered enough...

read more
Michigan Forfeiture News Articles

Michigan Forfeiture News Articles

Can the police sieze your belongings and hold it without charging you with a crime?Civil asset forfeiture is a legal process that allows law enforcement agencies in Michigan to seize property they suspect is connected to criminal activity, even if the owner hasn't...

read more
What Happens When the Government Takes Your Property?

What Happens When the Government Takes Your Property?

Can the police sieze your belongings and hold it without charging you with a crime?Forfeiture laws in Michigan allow the government to seize property – like cash, cars, or even houses – if they believe it was involved in a crime.  This can happen even if the owner...

read more

Defending Against Criminal Sex Charges

Defense against false accusations of Criminal Sexual Conduct (CSC) in MichiganDefending against a false accusation of Criminal Sexual Conduct (CSC) in Michigan is a serious matter and requires a well-prepared legal strategy. Here are several steps you should take to...

read more
Forfeiture without Criminal Charges

Forfeiture without Criminal Charges

Can the police seize your belongings and hold it without charging you with a crime?Read the summary below and watch Attorney Michael Komorn in the Court of Appeals.Summary of "Ruben Delgado v. Michigan State Police": This case was filed in the Jackson County Circuit...

read more
Criminal Sexual Conduct (CSC) – Michigan

Criminal Sexual Conduct (CSC) – Michigan

Criminal Sexual Conduct (CSC) in Michigan: Definitions, Penalties, and Legal References.Criminal Sexual Conduct (CSC) is a set of laws in Michigan that define and penalize various forms of sexual offenses. These laws are categorized into four degrees, with each degree...

read more
23andMe filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and your data is?

23andMe filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and your data is?

As of Friday 3/28/25, the firm’s shares were worth less than a dollar.If you are charged with a crime you're part of the State of Michigan family now. Call us - Because you don't want to be a part of that family. Komorn Law (248) 357-2550Genetic testing service...

read more
Michael Komorn-Criminal Defense Attorney

About Your Attorney

Attorney Michael Komorn

Categories

Other Topics

Driving Under the Influence

Michigan

Your Rights

Michigan Court of Appeals

Law Firm VIctories

Share This