Rosse Family Revocable Living Trust v. City of Jonesboro

Citation: 2026 Ark. App. 121, 2026 WL 517536 (Ark. Ct. App. Feb. 25, 2026), No. CV-24-790

Relevant Facts

• The case arose from a 2015 nuisance-abatement action and lien foreclosure involving two parcels in Jonesboro, Arkansas.

• Both parcels were originally owned by the Rosse Family Revocable Living Trust.

• In January 2020, Karen (trustee) deeded lots 7, 8, and 9 to her sons Samson, Samuel, and William individually; the Trust retained lots 5 and 6.

• In 2020, the City demolished a structure and completed clean-up work at its own expense.

• The City sent a 30-day notice only to “Rosse Family Trust c/o Karen Siegel”—no notices were sent to the individual owners by name.

• The City filed a lien for $124,836.50 in clean-up costs and later sought foreclosure.

• The circuit court entered judgment and decree of foreclosure against all parcels, finding statutory notice sufficient because it was mailed to Karen as fiduciary/trustee.

Legal Issues

Whether the default judgment against William was proper; whether the City timely filed its lien within the 120-day statutory period; and whether the City complied with statutory notice requirements for the individual owners of lots 7, 8, and 9.

Positions of the Parties

Appellants: Challenged the default judgment; disputed lien timeliness; argued the City failed to provide proper statutory notice to the individual owners of lots 7, 8, and 9 by sending notice only to the Trust.

City: Argued the lien was timely and statutory notice was proper when mailed to the address of record addressed to Karen as trustee.

Decision of the Court

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART.

Reasons for the Decision

• Default judgment was affirmed: appellants failed to preserve their arguments by not filing a Rule 55 motion to set aside default at the trial level. No written motion was required for default against William because he had not appeared.

• Lien timeliness was affirmed: clean-up work was completed October 27, 2020, and the lien was filed February 23, 2021—within the 120-day statutory period.

• Statutory notice was reversed: lien provisions must be strictly construed. The statute requires notice to “the owner” when the owner’s identity is known. The individual owners’ identities were readily ascertainable from county records. No evidence showed Karen was authorized to accept notice on behalf of the individual owners. Notice to a different legal entity is insufficient under strict construction.