Jones v. Flowers
Jones v. Flowers, 547 U.S. 220 (2006)
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Decided
- 2006-04-26
- Docket
- 04-1477
What happened
Gary Jones moved out of his Arkansas house but kept paying the mortgage. When taxes went unpaid, the state mailed notice by certified mail; it came back unclaimed, and the state sold the house anyway.
What the court decided
The Supreme Court held that when mailed notice of a tax sale comes back undelivered, due process requires the government to take additional reasonable steps to notify the owner before selling, if practicable.
In the court's words
“the government must take additional reasonable steps to provide notice before taking the owner’s property”
Why it may matter to you
Notice is a constitutional right. If the tax office knew its letters were not reaching you and did nothing more, that can matter.
Why it might not apply
It requires reasonable extra steps, not proof you actually received notice. Deadlines to challenge a tax sale can be short.
Most useful when
- Your home was sold for taxes and the notice letters came back undelivered
How to cite it
The full citation for the first time you mention it, a short form for later, and a sample sentence you can adapt.
Jones v. Flowers, 547 U.S. 220 (2006)Short formJones, 547 U.S. 220Draft — check it with free legal aid before you file or say it in court.
In Jones v. Flowers, 547 U.S. 220 (2006), the court held that when mailed notice of a tax sale is returned undelivered, the government must take additional reasonable steps to notify the owner before selling the property. Here, [say in one sentence what happened in your case]
Ask Techy about this case
Techy explains the case in plain words, why it may matter to you, its limits, and how to prepare. It only uses this case record.
Related cases
- Homeowner wonBinding
Mennonite Board of Missions v. Adams
462 U.S. 791 · Decided 1983
An Indiana county sold property for unpaid taxes after notice only by posting and publication. The mortgage holder, whose name and address were on public record, was not mailed notice.
Read the case - Homeowner wonBinding
Tyler v. Hennepin County
598 U.S. 631 · Decided 2023
Geraldine Tyler, 94 years old, owed about $15,000 in property taxes on her Minneapolis condo. The county seized it, sold it for $40,000, and kept all of it.
Read the case - Homeowner lostBinding
Pung v. Isabella County
No. 25-95 (U.S. June 23, 2026) · Decided 2026
The Pung family owed about $2,242 in property taxes. Isabella County, Michigan, sold their home — assessed at $194,400 — for $76,008 at auction. Their representative argued they were owed the home's fair market value, not just the auction surplus.
Read the case