IN RE: CARRIE ANN REINHARDT; TIMOTHY CONRAD REINHARDT, CARRIE ANN REINHARDT, v. WESTON PRINCE, Bay County Treasurer - Articles

All Content

IN RE: CARRIE ANN REINHARDT; TIMOTHY CONRAD REINHARDT, CARRIE ANN REINHARDT, v. WESTON PRINCE, Bay County Treasurer

Posted by: Azya Thornton on May 27, 2026

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Matthew A. Sous, LEGAL SERVICES OF EASTERN MICHIGAN, Saginaw, Michigan, for Appellant.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Andrew C. Thompson, POZNAK DYER KANAR SCHEFSKY THOMPSON, PLC, Midland, Michigan, for Appellee.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Matthew A. Sous, LEGAL SERVICES OF EASTERN MICHIGAN, Saginaw, Michigan, for Appellant.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Andrew C. Thompson, POZNAK DYER KANAR SCHEFSKY THOMPSON, PLC, Midland, Michigan, for Appellee.

Judge(s): MOORE, GRIFFIN, and NALBANDIAN, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Bay City

NALBANDIAN, Circuit Judge. In Michigan, counties follow a years-long process when foreclosing on properties to satisfy property tax liens. In the third and final year of this process, a court enters a foreclosure judgment against the property. Then, the property owner must pay off the tax lien before the judgment’s deadline or else the county receives title to the property. Once the county has title, the former owner loses all rights to the property except the right to the foreclosure sale’s proceeds. But the county takes a cut, which includes the tax deficiency, interest, fees, a 5% sales commission, and the county’s expenses. This case involves the interaction between that process and the United States Bankruptcy Code. Carrie Ann Reinhardt owned a house in Bay County, Michigan. In 2019, she didn’t pay her property taxes, so Bay County initiated foreclosure. When a Michigan court entered a foreclosure judgment against the property three years later, Reinhardt owed the county $5,845 and the property’s fair market value was roughly $75,000. Bay County received title to Reinhardt’s property. And shortly after, Reinhardt filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy and then filed a complaint seeking to avoid (undo) the transfer of title as preferential under the Code. The bankruptcy court granted the Bay County Treasurer’s summary-judgment motion and denied Reinhardt’s. The district court affirmed. But because we find that Reinhardt established that the transfer was preferential under 11 U.S.C. § 547(b)(4) and § 547(b)(5) as a matter of law, we reverse.

Attachments: