Civil Practice – Statute of Limitations – Conversion Action

The circuit court erred when it found the statute of limitations precluded RS&A Piping’s action to set aside the tax sale.

We reversed and remanded pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR.

RS&A Piping and Fabrication, Inc. appealed the circuit court’s order dismissing its action to set aside a tax sale conducted by the Marlboro County Delinquent Tax Collector and for conversion against Ronald D. Kirby, Dylan T. Kirby, and Danny T. Williams. On appeal, RS&A Piping argued the circuit court erred in finding the statute of limitations barred its action to set aside the tax sale and dismissing its action for conversion based upon its statute of limitations determination.

We held the circuit court erred when it found the statute of limitations precluded RS&A Piping’s action to set aside the tax sale because Marlboro County failed to strictly comply with statutory notice requirements in its mailing of the redemption notice, a fundamental defect, which rendered the statute of limitations inapplicable. The statute setting forth the requirements for mailing the redemption notice following a tax sale requires the notice be sent “neither more than 45 days nor less than 20 days before the end of the redemption period”; however, Marlboro County mailed the redemption notice at least 47 days before the end of the redemption period.

Although RS&A Piping filed its action to set aside the tax sale over two years after the tax sale concluded, tax sales are required to be in strict compliance with statutory requirements. In fact, actual notice of the tax sale is insufficient to overcome lack of adherence to the statutory notice requirements. When there is a failure to provide the required statutory notice, the defect is jurisdictional, preventing the statute of limitations from running. Because the statute explicitly provided that the notice must be sent no more than 45 days before the end of the redemption period and Marlboro County failed to strictly comply with this requirement, the tax sale was rendered void and the statute of limitations inapplicable.

We reversed the circuit court’s order finding the statute of limitations barred RS&A Piping’s action to set aside the tax sale. Further, because the circuit court dismissed RS&A Piping’s action for conversion on the basis of the statute of limitations barring its claim to set aside the tax sale, we also reversed the court’s dismissal of the conversion claim and remanded for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.

RS&A Piping & Fabrication Inc. v. Kirby (Lawyers’ Weekly No. 012-019-25, 4 pp.) (Per Curiam) Appealed from Marlboro County Circuit Court (Roger E. Henderson, J.) Leonard R. Jordan, Jr., of Jordan Law Firm, of Columbia, for Appellant; Jon Rene Josey, of Turner Padget Graham & Laney, PA, of Florence; and Allison Truitt Burch, of Spencer Law Firm, of Chesterfield, both for Respondents Ronald D. Kirby, Dylan T. Kirby, and Danny T. Williams; Andrew Foster McLeod, of McLeod & Ruffner, of Cheraw; and Andrew F. Lindemann, of Lindemann Law Firm, P.A., of Columbia, both for Respondent Treasurer For Marlboro County. South Carolina Court of Appeals Unpublished