Where, under West Virginia law, absolute title to appellant's
oil and gas interest in land had vested in the State at the
expiration of the 18-month period after sale of the interest to the
State for nonpayment of taxes, during which period appellant might
have exercised but did not exercise her right to redeem, appellant
has no constitutionally protected property or entitlement interest
upon which she may base a challenge of constitutional deficiency in
the notice provisions attending the State's subsequent sale of the
interest to appellee Dodd, and hence the appeal is dismissed for
want of a properly presented federal question.
Appeal dismissed. Reported below: ___ W.Va. ___, 221 S. .2d
171.
PER CURIAM.
When appellant failed to pay 1961 real estate taxes pertaining
to her one-quarter interest in the oil and gas in 68 acres of land
in Kanawha County, W.Va., the interest became subject to transfer
to the State under West Virginia statutory procedures that afford
notice to the landowner only through the posting of a delinquency
list on the county courthouse door and the publication of the list
in local newspapers. W.Va.Code §§ 11A-2-10a, 11A-2 (1974). The
interest was sold to the State under these procedures in 1962.
Page 429 U. S. 397
West Virginia Code § 11A-3-8 (1974) gave appellant a statutory
entitlement to redeem the interest at any time within 18 months of
the date of the state purchase, but appellant did not redeem during
that period. The State thereafter decided to sell the interest and,
as required by West Virginia law, commenced a suit in State Circuit
Court to effect a sale. The suit resulted in the conveyance in
1966, by tax deed, of the oil and gas interest to appellee W. P.
Dodd. The only notice of this sale was by way of publication in two
local newspapers, pursuant to § 11A-4-12 (1974). Over two years
later, in July, 1968, appellant attempted to pay the State Auditor
a sum of money to redeem the interest. Appellant then brought this
action in state court to quiet title. The Circuit Court rendered
judgment for appellees. The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals
affirmed, ___ W.Va. ___,
221 S.E.2d
171 (1975). We noted probable jurisdiction. 426 U.S. 946
(1976).
The Jurisdictional Statement phrased the due process question
presented by the appeal as whether notice by publication of the tax
sale was constitutionally deficient, but was unclear whether the
challenge was directed to the 1962 sale to the State or to the 1966
sale to appellee Dodd. At oral argument counsel for appellant made
clear, however, that her challenge was not addressed to the
procedures for notice attending the 1962 transfer of the interest
to the State, Tr. of Oral Arg. 21-23, but solely to the procedures
for notice attending the 1966 sale of the interest by the State to
appellee Dodd. Indeed, we were repeatedly informed that the 1962
sale to the State was not even "an issue in this case."
Id. at 22, 25, 26. But under state law absolute title had
vested in the State at the expiration of the 18-month period after
the 1962 sale during which appellant might have exercised but did
not exercise her right to redeem: § 11A-4-12 expressly provides
that in such circumstance
"the State has absolute title to all . . . land sold to the
State for nonpayment of
Page 429 U. S. 398
taxes . . . [which has] become irredeemable. . . ."
Appellant thus has no constitutionally protected property or
entitlement interest upon which she may base a challenge of
constitutional deficiency in the notice provisions attending the
1966 sale to appellee Dodd. The appeal is therefore dismissed for
want of a properly presented federal question.
So ordered.
