Azadozy

Azadozy v. Nikoghosian

Good Law
128 Cal. App. 4th 1369·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 698·2005 Daily Journal DAR 5073·27 Cal. Rptr. 3d 811·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3719
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 4, 2005F045677California1,385 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ardaiz, J.

Appellant Harold Nikoghosian is the chief accountant of the Kings County Auditor’s Office. He appeals from a writ of mandate issued by the superior court directing him to pay to respondent Zarmina Azadozy the “excess proceeds” (Rev. & Tax. Code, § 4675) from the tax sale of a parcel of property located at 421 West Stanislaus Street in Avenal. Nikoghosian contends that the trial court erred in ordering the issuance of the writ of mandate because Azadozy is not within the class of persons described in section 4675 as being entitled to claim excess proceeds from a tax sale. As we shall explain, we agree with appellant Nikoghosian. We hold that a holder of unrecorded title to property sold at a tax sale is not a “party of interest” within the meaning of section 4675.

FACTS

The facts are not in dispute. Azadozy purchased the property at a trustee’s sale on or about April 25, 1996. She did not record her deed. Property taxes on the property were not paid for several years. On or about March 14, 2003, the property was sold at a tax sale. In October of 2003 Azadozy filed a claim with Kings County for the excess proceeds from the tax sale. Nikoghosian rejected Azadozy’s claim.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.