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.
MCL – Article X § 2 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.
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

Free Speech, Terror and Michigan Law
Michigan Supreme Court Vacates Court of Appeals Ruling, Temporarily Preserves State Anti-Terror StatuteIf 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)...

The Takings Clauses of the United States and Michigan
These clauses protect property rights and maintain a balance between public needs and individual ownership The Takings Clauses of the United States and Michigan Constitutions are pivotal components of property law, ensuring that private property is not seized by the...
Other Articles
Criminal Law FAQs – Probation Violations
Michigan Criminal Laws FAQs Theft CrimesAccording to Michigan State Law (Michigan Compiled Laws - MCL), a Probation Violation occurs when a person who has been sentenced to probation fails to comply with the terms and conditions of their probation order. These terms...
Michigan lawmakers want to revive “junk science” roadside drug testing
The Roadside Drug Test...AgainHouse bills 4390 and 4391The proposed House bills 4390 and 4391 would enable law enforcement to administer tests aimed at assessing driver impairment; however, these testing devices do not provide information regarding the level of...
Criminal Law FAQs – Theft Crimes
Michigan Criminal Laws FAQs Theft CrimesAccording to Michigan State Law (Michigan Compiled Laws - MCL), Theft Crimes generally involve the unlawful taking of someone else's property with the intent to deprive them of it, either permanently or for a significant period....
Criminal Law FAQs – Domestic Violence
Michigan Criminal Laws FAQs Domestic ViolenceAccording to Michigan State Law, Domestic Violence is not a standalone criminal offense but rather a designation applied to certain crimes when the victim is a "spouse or former spouse, an individual with whom the person...
Criminal Law FAQs – Assault and Battery
Michigan Criminal Laws FAQs Assault and BatteryAccording to Michigan State Law, Assault and Battery are distinct but often related offenses. There isn't one single statute that explicitly defines both terms together. Instead, their definitions have evolved through...
Other Bodily Fluid House Hearing – HB-4391- Update 5-22-25
Michigan House HearingHB-4391 Saliva Test Update 5-22-25Watch the hearing or read the summary.Click here or image below to see videoFYI: Marijuana although voted to be legalized is still classified as a controlled substance in the State of Michigan and Federally. More...
Criminal Law FAQs – Marijuana Offenses
Michigan Criminal Laws FAQs Marijuana OffensesFAQ 1: Is recreational marijuana legal in Michigan? Answer: Yes, recreational marijuana is legal for adults 21 and over in Michigan. However, there are restrictions on possession, use in public places, and driving under...
Criminal Law FAQs – Operating While Intoxicated (DUI – OWI)
Michigan Criminal Laws FAQs Drunk Driving (Operating While Intoxicated - OWI)FAQ 1: What is the legal blood alcohol content (BAC) limit in Michigan? Answer: In Michigan, the legal BAC limit for operating a vehicle is 0.08% for individuals 21 years of age or older. For...