12.13 V. Effect Of Mennonite On In Rem Actions

• Jurisdiction: New York

V. Effect of Mennonite on In Rem Actions

In rem proceedings, without personal service of process, had been popular in the past because they were “quick and cheap.”¹⁸¹⁴ In rem proceedings in the tax enforcement area have frequently been challenged on constitutional grounds. Prior to Mennonite Board of Missions v. Adams,¹⁸¹⁵ the proceedings had been sustained despite allegations of lack of personal jurisdiction, actual notice and due process.¹⁸¹⁶

In sustaining the constitutionality of these statutes, courts stressed that every property owner is necessarily chargeable with the knowledge that his real estate is subject to the payment of taxes and that he may forfeit his right to ownership and possession if he neglects to make payment. The courts also pointed out that the duty rests upon the owner to keep informed concerning obligations attaching to the ownership of real property. Failure to do so and notice affecting the lands, usually by publication, fails to reach the owner, it is the owner’s misfortune and he or she must suffer the consequences.¹⁸¹⁷

There is no reported authority in New York for applying the “shocks the conscience”...