United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
January 30, 2007
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
06-60268
Summary Calendar
DIANNE S. PITTMAN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
JIM HOOD, Attorney General;
PEARL RIVER COUNTY, Pearl River
County Board of Supervisors;
CLAIBORNE MCDONALD, District Attorney;
CITY OF PICAYUNE MISSISSIPPI;
ZACKERY J. GRIMES; ANITA M. GRIMES;
JIM NICHOLSON, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT
OF VETERANS AFFAIRS; HICKORY RIDGE,
Addition Lot 44, Hickory Ridge Subdivision,
A Subdivision of Pearl River County,
Section 8, Township 6 South, Range 17 West,
Parcel No.: 617-308-000-01-011-00,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Mississippi
No. 1:04-CV-465
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
This case involves competing claims to certain real property
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
in Picayune, Mississippi. Appellant Dianne Pittman appeals the
district court’s grant of summary judgment. We affirm.
The facts are undisputed. In 1990, Zackery and Anita Grimes
purchased the property at issue. Ultimately, the deed of trust was
assigned to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs (Secretary). In
1998, the City of Picayune, Mississippi sold the property for
delinquent ad valorem taxes to a company called Destiny 98.
However, the Secretary was not given the requisite statutory
notice. Miss. Code Ann. §§ 27-43-4; 27-43-5. Failure to give the
requisite notice renders the tax title void as to that lien holder.
Miss. Code Ann. § 27-43-11.
In 2001, the successor company to Destiny 98, U.S. Public
Finance, Inc., conveyed its interest in the property to Mississippi
Realty Tax Financing Company. Mississippi Realty subsequently
conveyed its interest to Appellant, who has resided on the property
since May 2001.
Meanwhile, in 1999, Destiny 98 or its successor failed to pay
taxes on the land, and the property was sold for delinquent taxes
to College Investment Company. In 2002, College Investment
quitclaimed its interest in the property to the Secretary.
Relying on a Mississippi statute, Appellant argues that any
defect in the 1998 sale has been cured by her actual occupation of
the property for three years. See Miss. Code Ann. § 15-1-15.
Section 15-1-15 provides that “[a]ctual occupation for three years,
2
after two years from the day of sale of land held under a
conveyance by a tax collector in pursuance of a sale for taxes,
shall bar any suit to recover such land or assail such title
because of any defect in the sale of the land for taxes, or in any
precedent step to the sale . . . .” Mississippi law requires a
party relying on this statute to be in privity with the previous
owners. See Wilson v. Clark, 278 So.2d 250 (Miss. 1973).
Appellant admits that her claim to the title derives from the 1998
tax sale. As previously set forth, in 1999, the property was sold
a second time for delinquent taxes. Assuming arguendo that
Appellant’s occupation bars suit based on any defect with respect
to the 1998 sale, Appellant is not in privity with the chain of
title from the subsequent 1999 tax sale. Thus, Appellant’s
occupation of the land does not affect the validity of the
subsequent 1999 tax sale.
Appellant next challenges the 1999 sale. She argues that
notice of the right to redeem was not properly served on the owners
of the property after the 1999 sale. She asserts that the district
court did not address this contention. Contrary to Appellant’s
assertion, the district court did address the improper service of
notice argument. The court recognized that under Mississippi law
the record owner must be given notice of the right to redeem the
property. See Miss. Code. Ann. § 27-43-1. Mississippi Realty was
given notice of the right of redemption. The district court
3
concluded that although the form notice incorrectly identified
Mississippi Realty as a lien holder, the notice was adequate.
Appellant does not challenge the adequacy of the notice to
Mississippi Realty; instead, she relies on the fact that no notice
was given to Zackery or Anita Grimes, who owned the property at the
time of the first tax sale. However, with respect to the 1999
sale, they were not the record owners as defined by the Mississippi
statute. Miss. Code Ann. § 27-45-1. This argument offers
Appellant no relief.
AFFIRMED.
4