Home › Case briefs › Civil Procedure

Covey v. Town of Somers

Supreme Court of the United States · 1956 · Civil Procedure

Civil ProcedureDue ProcessNoticeTax foreclosureFourteenth AmendmentDue Process Clausenoticementally incompetent

Facts

The Town of Somers brought a tax lien foreclosure proceeding against property owned by Nora Brainard and gave notice by mail, posting, and publication as the New York statute required. No answer was filed, judgment of foreclosure was entered, and a deed was delivered to the town. Appellant later alleged by uncontroverted affidavits that Brainard had long been incompetent, was financially able to pay her obligations, had no one available to assist her, and was known by town officials to lack the mental capacity to understand notices or manage her affairs, yet no guardian or committee had been appointed before the foreclosure. When appellant, as committee, offered to repay the taxes and related charges in exchange for return of the property, the town refused.

Issue

Whether application of New York's tax foreclosure notice procedures to a property owner known by town officials to be an unprotected incompetent satisfied the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Also, whether appellant could properly raise that constitutional objection by motion in the original proceeding.

Rule

Due process requires notice reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action and afford them an opportunity to present objections. Compliance with a statutory notice procedure is constitutionally insufficient when the State gives notice to a person known to be incompetent and without the protection of a guardian, because such notice is not reasonably calculated to actually inform that person.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Akron, Ohio, the city began an in rem proceeding to foreclose municipal sewer liens against a duplex owned by Lena Ortiz. The city mailed notice to Lena, posted notice at city hall, and published notice in a local paper exactly as the statute required, but housing officials had long documented that Lena could not understand written communications and had no guardian or other representative.

If Lena does not respond and the city obtains title, which is the strongest constitutional argument against the foreclosure?

Explanation. Due process requires notice reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise interested parties of the proceeding and allow objections. When officials know the owner is incompetent and lacks a guardian, notice sent only to that person is not reasonably calculated to inform her, even if the statute was followed exactly. Statutory compliance alone does not satisfy due process in those circumstances.