Kese Industries, Inc. v. Roslyn Torah Foundation, 19 N.Y.3d 484 (2012)
The term “legal representative” in Nassau County Administrative Code § 5-51.0, regarding notice of tax lien redemption, refers to executors or administrators of an estate, not to a party’s attorney in a pending action.
Summary
Kese Industries, a mortgagee in a foreclosure action, and Roslyn Gate Corporation, a property owner, challenged the validity of a tax deed issued to Gillen Living Trust. The challenge was based on Gillen’s failure to serve notice to redeem the tax lien on Kese’s foreclosure attorney and the court-appointed referee. The New York Court of Appeals reversed the lower courts, holding that a foreclosure attorney is not a “legal representative” under Nassau County Administrative Code § 5-51.0, and that a referee is not an interested party requiring notice. This decision clarifies the scope of required notice in tax lien foreclosure proceedings, emphasizing the traditional definition of “legal representative.”
Facts
Roslyn Torah Foundation (RTF) defaulted on a mortgage held by Kese Industries, leading to a foreclosure action. RTF also defaulted on property taxes, resulting in Nassau County issuing a tax lien to Gillen Living Trust. Gillen served notice to redeem the tax lien on Kese, RTF, and Roslyn Gate Corporation, but did not serve Kese’s foreclosure attorney or the court-appointed referee. Kese and Roslyn Gate then sued, claiming the tax deed issued to Gillen was void due to improper notice.
Procedural History
Supreme Court ruled in favor of Kese and Roslyn Gate, voiding the tax deed because Gillen failed to serve Kese’s attorney. The Appellate Division affirmed, relying on precedent that defined a “legal representative” to include a mortgagee’s foreclosure attorney. Gillen appealed to the New York Court of Appeals, arguing that a foreclosure attorney does not fall under the definition of “legal representative” in the relevant statute.
Issue(s)
1. Whether the term “legal representative” in Nassau County Administrative Code § 5-51.0 includes a mortgagee’s attorney in a pending foreclosure action.
2. Whether a court-appointed referee in a foreclosure action is an interested party entitled to notice under Nassau County Administrative Code § 5-51.0.
Holding
1. No, because the term “legal representative” ordinarily denotes the executor or administrator of an estate, not a party’s attorney in a pending action.
2. No, because the referee is an agent of the court performing ministerial duties, not a party with a lien, claim, or interest in the property.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court of Appeals reasoned that the term “legal representative,” in its ordinary sense, refers to someone who manages the legal affairs of another due to incapacity or death, such as an executor or administrator. The Court cited its prior decisions, noting that “‘legal representatives’ mean ordinarily executors or administrators, and that meaning will be attributed to them in any instance unless there be facts existing which show that the words were not used in their ordinary sense, but to denote some other and different idea.”
The court emphasized the principle of noscitur a sociis, interpreting the term in relation to the adjacent words in the statute: “heirs” and “assigns,” all of which relate to the transfer of rights and duties of a property owner. The presence of the term “attorney” in other sections of the Nassau County Administrative Code indicated that the legislature would have used that term explicitly if it intended to include attorneys in the notice requirement. The Court further reasoned that a referee acts as an agent of the court without any independent legal interest in the property. The court stated, “the legislative purpose of requiring service upon a ‘legal representative’ is to ensure that personal representatives, namely executors or administrators of an estate, are notified of a risk of divestiture of title to their property.”