Comments on ROSS v. ROSEN-RAGER

My observations regarding this case are as follows:

1. Evidence in this case shows that Mr. Ross was not a routine investor that just happened to get “snagged” on a misunderstanding of Alabama statute, but was in fact was attempting to execute a premeditated serial mission to postulate that his right of possession (on all the properties he had purchased) was not extinguished until he was reimbursed for non-tax expenses. This according to his interpretation of Code Section 40-10-122. The judicial system felt differently.

2. Thankfully, the courts showed their disdain for Mr. Ross’s antics by initially awarding punitive damages of $350,000. Later the Alabama Supreme Court reduced that to $120,000. I hope he got the message. You shouldn’t be able to simply IGNORE multiple court orders and get away with it.

3. I would not recommend that ANY property tax investor attempt to take possession on a CERTIFICATE interest except in the most unusual circumstances. Even then, Code Section 40-10-122 should be followed to the most minute detail.

Note: A good synopsis of this case can be found here and here .