Pung v. Isabella County, Michigan
Decision
Opinion of the Court
The Facts
Isabella County, Michigan sold Marc Pung's home at public auction for $76,008 to satisfy a $2,241.93 delinquent property tax debt, retaining the surplus above the debt as county funds. The property's claimed market value was approximately $194,400. Pung challenged the practice under the Takings Clause and Excessive Fines Clause, arguing that allowing the government to keep surplus value from a tax foreclosure sale is unconstitutional.
The Issue
Whether a government's retention of surplus proceeds from a tax foreclosure sale — where the sale price far exceeds the tax debt owed — constitutes an uncompensated taking under the Fifth Amendment; and whether such retention constitutes an excessive fine under the Eighth Amendment.
The Rules
No private property shall be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
A state's retention of surplus proceeds from a tax forfeiture sale beyond the amount of a tax debt and associated costs is an unconstitutional taking under the Fifth Amendment.
The Application
Pung argues Isabella County's retention of $73,766 in surplus proceeds from his home's tax sale — far exceeding the $2,241 tax debt — is an uncompensated taking under the Fifth Amendment. Tyler v. Hennepin County (2023) held that government retention of surplus equity in tax foreclosure sales violates the Takings Clause.
Isabella County argues the sale and retention occurred under then-existing Michigan law before Tyler was decided. The county contends the remedy question is distinct from the violation — even if Tyler applies, the scope of required compensation and retroactive application to pre-Tyler forfeitures remain unsettled.
Argued February 25, 2026. Tyler v. Hennepin County (2023) established the constitutional violation; Pung asks what property owners are owed and whether pre-Tyler forfeitures can be challenged. The ruling will determine remedies for potentially thousands of homeowners who lost surplus equity in tax sales before Tyler changed the law.
The Conclusion
In a unanimous decision, the Court held that the proper measure of just compensation after a government tax foreclosure sale is the auction price actually obtained, not a higher independent valuation. The ruling sets a clear standard limiting homeowners' ability to claim additional compensation beyond what the sale generated.
No circuit court data for this case.
Flag an issue
This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support