GERALDINE TYLER, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. HENNEPIN COUNTY and MARK V. CHAPIN, Auditor-Treasurer, in his official capacity, Defendants., 505 F. Supp. 3d 879

Summary

HOLDINGS: [1]-A taxpayer did not have a viable takings claim because nothing in the constitutions of the United States or Minnesota, Minn. Const. art. I, § 13, nothing in any federal or state statute, and nothing in federal or state common law gave the former owner of a piece of property that had been lawfully forfeited to the State and then sold to pay delinquent taxes a right to any surplus; [2]-Minnesota's tax-forfeiture scheme had none of the hallmarks of punishment, and it was a debt-collection system whose primary purpose was plainly remedial, assisting the government in collecting past-due property taxes and compensating the government for the losses caused by the non-payment of property taxes. Therefore, the statute did not impose a "fine" within the meaning of the Excessive Fines Clause of either the United States or Minnesota Constitution, Minn. Const. art. I, § 5.