ÿWPCà Û•Aìî5‹†í†í7þ’õž ûÉ_yw0fNcÎLÒÁ’þ(‰àäÌÕ'H¤2 ù¥)çŸÿ+(õ•†Q–ä²ðí‘Þf¨ÈxÍó¡½iDºpmöKñ†~…ë2â’éL I¥7¸?ÌN Öã#íê=¸âü%塤f¹Mö1xªš#˜ý3ð=›‘„¥¥îµ¤ncÝ™}‹õߢù€mKúÂGzi¾µóB±i·}Cg_‰ €ˆ£SäumÂN.°œMnÁ,®6o3²B)èTŽ!aô–D3Ùo$1µ®Jµ"Ò¨SÐ8Òë¯úßm;æÖ.ÝsnHóãl#*ëË¡ã-m˜•²/µUå"è¯õ´yhð+b ¸nšçzþ¦Ä'·èñDüýljM*n n£ËB·?«˜ tÙ€ác ûJ¸kOP>Nn¥—…Æ¿Ømf½> tb¬~Àr>!2È|Vþæ3ÈwŽ þÑ sÿÅ@:rîÑË6_P nO)Çšu$XW'‰/êχêƒ\¹¨[;¡§EýÍ¡‘kf>V*ÖË!d3 n„@˜C©R÷5…×­S=]Á!êÉÛ<KÊÿŒé éRdx¤ E·ŒøÙb#É\ %% ^ + 0ˆ7 UN¿ w 4 z% ÒŸ q € m‚  ™ ƹÆÆEÆ  NÑÑÑEÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓbÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕÕ 0ëÝÝÝÝ BÈÈ 0¤å D3‰ D-¼ 0Kéé AS4Ƈ 0¤M 0Dñ A«5˜\\IB01S01\CLERK1NASÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»]sg/Ï (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular–ƒd/ê:i¢×+00 ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ Sp.J. P.J.DunavantSpiveyRickyStallings DUIDeptTerminixLoudermill ReddMcClennanMullaneBaggettNatlaffdBeazleyArmourWarmathCommn RptrTeasleyTenneseeeIntl COATatumdismantlerBaughman TMCCLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5- ù-(|G2x $¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€G…»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôâ…ò»»Ô d(|3‡‚$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€G…»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3‡‚$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€G…»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€G…»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼G…»»»ÔÑ8€IXXdì»»d8Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡î\üG…ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼G…»îî\ü #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àSeptember€5,€2003€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XIX»¼G…ÔÌò òÔ#†¼G…»XXI#ÔTOYOTA€MOTOR€CREDIT€CORPORATIONòòóó€v.€STATE€OF€TENNESSEEÐ úJ ÐDEPARTMENT€OF€SAFETYòòóóÔ‡XIX»¼G…Ôó óÐ  ^ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ  ^ Ðà@@øøìàNo.€02„2062„II€€€€€€Walter€C.€Kurtz,€Judge€by€InterchangeÐ ú J ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<½` AßÐ ¾  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2003„00147„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€November€7,€Ô_Ô2003Ô_ÔÐ ¹  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<` AßÐ ‘á  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThis€case€involves€the€seizure€and€forfeiture€of€a€leased€vehicle.€€The€Department€of€Safety€(ð ðtheÐ ŒÜ ÐDepartmentðð)€sent€a€notice€of€the€forfeiture€proceedings€to€the€corporate€owner/lessor€at€the€addressÐ xÈ Ðlisted€on€the€vehicleððs€certificate€of€title.€€Because€the€owner€had€moved€two€years€previously€andÐ d´ Ðthe€Postal€Service€had€ceased€forwarding€its€mail,€the€unopened€certified€letter€was€returned€to€theÐ P  ÐDepartment€marked€Ô#†¼G…»XXI¾#ÔÔ‡XIX»¼G…Ôð ðNot€Deliverable€as€Addressed€Unable€to€Forward.ðð€Ô#†¼G…»XXID#ÔÔ‡XIX»¼G…Ô€The€Department€took€noÐ <Œ Ðfurther€steps€to€locate€the€owner€and€summarily€ordered€the€forfeiture€of€the€vehicle.€€Upon€learningÐ (x Ðof€the€forfeiture,€the€owner€filed€a€petition€for€a€stay€and€reconsideration,€which€the€DepartmentÐ d Ðdenied.€€The€owner€then€filed€a€petition€for€review€in€the€Chancery€Court€of€Davidson€County€inÐ P Ðwhich€it€challenged€the€adequacy€of€the€notice€procedure.€€The€trial€court€ruled€the€notice€procedureÐ ì< Ðdid€not€meet€constitutional€due€process€requirements€under€the€circumstances,€in€which€the€corporateÐ Ø( Ðowner€had€a€registered€agent€for€service€of€process€whose€name€and€address€were€easily€obtainableÐ Ä Ðthrough€the€Secretary€of€Stateððs€Office.€€The€Department€appeals,€arguing€that€due€process€does€notÐ ° Ðrequire€that€it€seek€out€a€corporate€owner€that€has€failed€to€notify€the€Department€of€its€change€ofÐ œì Ðaddress,€as€required€by€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€55„4„131.€€We€affirm€the€judgment€of€theÐ ˆØ Ðtrial€court.Ô#†¼G…»XXI¾#ÔÔ‡XIX»¼G…ÔÐ t Ä ÐÓÓò òÌTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€Affirmedó óÐ L"œ! ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼G…»àXIp #ÔÔ‡XIX.¼G…ÔAlan€E.€Glenn,€Sp.J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòWilliam€C.€Koch,€Jr.,€P.J.,Ð $$t# ÐM.S.,óó€and€òòWilliam€B.€Cain,€J.óó,€joined.Ð %` $ ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General,€and€Richard€H.€Dunavant,€Assistant€Attorney€General,Ð è&8"& ÐNashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€State€of€Tennessee€Department€of€Safety.Ð Ô'$#' ÐÌRandall€J.€Spivey,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€Toyota€Motor€Credit€Corporation.Ð ¬)ü$) ÐÓ" ÓÌÌÌÐ \-¬(-ý ÐÔ_Ôà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼G…»XXIQ #ÔÔ‡XIX»¼G…ÔÐ ° ÐòòóóÔ#†¼G…»XXIï#ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XIX»¼G…ÔÌòòóóà@ô ô ìàò òòòFACTS€AND€PROCEDURAL€HISTORYóóó óˆÐ ˆØ ÐÌà  àOn€February€14,€2002,€Ricky€D.€Stallings€was€driving€a€1999€Toyota€Tacoma€pickup€truckÐ `° Ðhe€had€leased€from€the€appellee,€Toyota€Motor€Credit€Corporation€(ð ðTMCCðð),€when€he€was€stoppedÐ L œ Ðby€a€Knoxville€police€officer€and€arrested€for€driving€under€the€influence,€third€offense,€and€drivingÐ 8 ˆ Ðon€a€revoked€license.€€The€vehicle€was€seized€pursuant€to€the€statutes€that€provide€for€the€forfeitureÐ $ t Ðof€a€vehicle€used€in€the€commission€of€a€personððs€second€or€subsequent€DUI€or€in€the€commissionÐ  ` Ðof€the€offense€of€driving€on€a€revoked€license€when€a€personððs€license€has€been€revoked€for€DUI.€Ð ü L  ÐòòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„33„201€òòet€seqóó.,€55„10„401,€„403,€„50„504.€€On€February€21,€2002,€theÐ è 8  ÐDepartment€of€Safety€sent€certified€letters€containing€information€about€the€forfeiture€warrant€andÐ Ô$  Ðthe€procedure€for€filing€a€claim€for€the€vehicle€to€Stallings€at€his€home€address€and€to€TMCC€at€theÐ À  Ðaddress€listed€on€the€vehicleððs€certificate€of€title€and€registration.€€The€record€establishes€thatÐ ¬ü  ÐStallings€signed€for€his€certified€letter,€but€that€the€certified€letter€sent€to€TMCC€was€returnedÐ ˜è  Ðunopened€and€marked€ð ðNot€Deliverable€as€Addressed€Unable€to€Forward.ðð€€Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àHaving€failed€to€receive€a€petition€from€any€party€asserting€a€claim€to€the€vehicle,€theÐ \¬ ÐDepartment€issued€a€summary€order€of€forfeiture€on€May€10,€2002.€€Thereafter,€TMCC€filed€aÐ H˜ Ðð ðPetition€for€Stay€and€Petition€for€Reconsiderationðð€in€the€Appeals€Division€of€the€Department,Ð 4„ Ðasserting,€òòinter€aliaóó,€that€it€had€relocated€its€office€from€Brentwood€to€Franklin€two€years€previously;Ð  p Ðthat€it€had€filed€a€request€with€the€United€States€Postal€Service€to€have€its€mail€forwarded€to€its€newÐ  \ Ðaddress€for€the€maximum€amount€of€time€allowed€by€law,€which€was€approximately€one€year;€thatÐ øH Ðit€was€licensed€to€do€business€in€the€State€of€Tennessee€and€maintained€a€registered€agent€for€serviceÐ ä4 Ðof€process€whose€name€and€address€were€on€file€with€the€Secretary€of€Stateððs€Office;€and€that€it€hadÐ Ð  Ðreceived€no€notice€of€the€forfeiture€of€the€vehicle.€€The€Appeals€Division€denied€TMCCððs€petition,Ð ¼  Ðruling€that€the€Departmentððs€notice€complied€with€the€forfeiture€rules€and€was€sufficient€to€satisfyÐ ¨ø Ðdue€process€requirements.€€Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àPursuant€to€the€provisions€of€the€Uniform€Administrative€Procedures€Act,€Tennessee€CodeÐ l¼ ÐAnnotated€sections€4„5„101€òòet€seq.óó,€TMCC€filed€a€petition€for€review€of€the€Departmentððs€ruling€inÐ X ¨ Ðthe€Chancery€Court€of€Davidson€County.€€In€a€detailed€and€lengthy€memorandum€and€order,€the€trialÐ D!” Ðcourt€concluded€that€because€the€Department€knew€TMCC€was€the€owner€of€the€vehicle€and€couldÐ 0"€  Ðhave€easily€obtained€its€correct€address€from€the€Secretary€of€Stateððs€Office,€the€notice€it€provided€Ð #l! Ðviolated€Article€1,€Section€8€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€Accordingly,€the€trial€court€remandedÐ $X" Ðthe€case€to€the€Commissioner€of€Safety€with€instructions€that€the€Department€grant€TMCC€a€hearingÐ ô$D # Ðon€its€claim€that€it€should€be€given€possession€of€the€vehicle.€€The€trial€courtððs€order€states€inÐ à%0!$ Ðpertinent€part:Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€Court€must€consider€the€[òòBrown€v.€Tennessee€Depððt€ofÐ ¤(ô#' ÐSafetyóó,€No.€01„A„01„9102„CH00043,€1992€WL€63444€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð )à$( ÐApp.€Apr.€1,€1992)]€factors€stated€above.€€The€Department€hadÐ |*Ì%) Ðknowledge€of€who€owned€the€property.€€It€would€have€been€fairlyÐ h+¸&* Ðsimple€for€the€Department€to€determine€the€correct€address€of€TMCCÐ ° Ðand€it€could€have€done€this€with€very€little€practical€difficulty.€Ð œì ÐCertainly€the€concept€of€notice€must€be€mixed€with€a€little€commonÐ ˆØ Ðsense.€€When€the€letter€came€back€that€said€TMCC€was€not€at€thisÐ tÄ Ðaddress€it€would€have€been€relatively€easy€for€an€employee€of€theÐ `° ÐDepartment€to€find€the€correct€address.€€Furthermore,€TMCC€is€theÐ L œ Ðkind€of€entity€which€anyone€with€the€least€bit€of€sense€would€knowÐ 8 ˆ Ðcould€be€located€with€little€effort.€€Obviously€someone€in€theÐ $ t ÐDepartment€was€unwilling€to€make€that€effort.Ð `` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€Court€is€of€the€opinion€that€under€the€facts€andÐ è 8  Ðcircumstances€of€this€case€due€process€required€that€the€DepartmentÐ Ô$  Ðnotify€the€petitioner€at€its€correct€and€easily€ascertained€address.€.€.€.€ÐÀ ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThis€Court€finds€that€the€petitioner€has€demonstrated€that€theÐ ˜è  ÐCommissionerððs€denial€of€his€request€for€a€hearing€was€unlawful€andÐ „Ô  Ðunconstitutional.€€The€notice€provided€here,€under€the€facts€andÐ pÀ Ðcircumstances€of€this€case,€violated€Art.€1,€ðð€8€of€the€TennesseeÐ \¬ ÐConstitution.ÐH˜` x` x ÐÌà  àFrom€this€order,€the€Department€now€appeals,€arguing€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€ruling€thatÐ  p Ðdue€process€required€more€than€a€certified€letter€sent€to€the€last€address€it€had€on€file€for€TMCC.€Ð  \ Ðà  àÌà@òò&ìàòòò òANALYSISó óóóˆÐ ä4 ÐÌà  àThe€Department€argues€its€procedure€of€sending€a€certified€letter€to€the€last€known€addressÐ ¼  Ðfor€the€vehicleððs€owner€constituted€a€method€of€providing€notice€that€was€reasonably€calculated€toÐ ¨ø Ðresult€in€actual€notice€and,€thus,€satisfied€the€due€process€clauses€of€both€the€United€States€andÐ ”ä ÐTennessee€Constitutions.€€The€Department€notes€due€process€does€not€require€that€notice€actuallyÐ €Ð Ðreach€a€potential€claimant€and€points€out€that€TMCC€failed€to€comply€with€Tennessee€CodeÐ l¼ ÐAnnotated€section€55„4„131(a),€which€requires€that€every€owner€of€a€vehicle€licensed€in€Tennessee€Ð X ¨ Ðnotify€the€Department€within€ten€days€of€any€change€in€address.€€The€Department€contends€the€trialÐ D!” Ðcourtððs€ruling€favors€corporations€by€establishing€a€higher€standard€for€notice€to€corporate€owners,Ð 0"€  Ðwhose€addresses€can€be€found€with€ð ðrelative€ease,ðð€and€a€lesser€standard€for€private€individuals.€Ð #l! ÐTMCC€concedes€it€failed€to€comply€with€the€requirements€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€55„Ð $X" Ð4„131(a),€but€argues€the€trial€court€properly€found€that€the€notice€here€did€not€satisfy€due€processÐ ô$D # Ðrequirements€given€the€particular€facts€and€circumstances€of€this€case.€Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àò òòòStandard€of€Reviewóóó óÐ ¸'#& ÐÌà  àThe€Uniform€Administrative€Procedures€Act€provides€for€judicial€review€of€an€administrativeÐ )à$( Ðagencyððs€decision€pursuant€to€the€following€standard:Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€court€may€affirm€the€decision€of€the€agency€or€remand€theÐ ° Ðcase€for€further€proceedings.€€The€court€may€reverse€or€modify€theÐ œì Ðdecision€if€the€rights€of€the€petitioner€have€been€prejudiced€becauseÐ ˆØ Ðthe€administrative€findings,€inferences,€conclusions€or€decisions€are:ÐtÄ` x` x ÐÌÓ*°,XƒX" –X°œX*Óà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(1)à0" ` x` xàIn€violation€of€constitutional€or€statutory€provisions;ÐL œ" x" x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(2)à0" ` x` xàIn€excess€of€the€statutory€authority€of€the€agency;Ð$ t" x" x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(3)à0" ` x` xàMade€upon€unlawful€procedure;Ðü L " x" x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(4)€à " àArbitrary€or€capricious€or€characterized€by€abuse€of€discretion€ÐÔ$ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àor€clearly€unwarranted€exercise€of€discretion;€orÐÀ ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(5)€à " àUnsupported€by€evidence€which€is€both€substantial€and€materialÐ ˜è  Ðin€the€light€of€the€entire€record.Ð„Ô ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àIn€determining€the€substantiality€of€evidence,€the€court€shall€take€intoÐ \¬ Ðaccount€whatever€in€the€record€fairly€detracts€from€its€weight,€but€theÐ H˜ Ðcourt€shall€not€substitute€its€judgment€for€that€of€the€agency€as€to€theÐ 4„ Ðweight€of€the€evidence€on€questions€of€fact.Ð p` x` x ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€4„5„322(h)€(Supp.€2003).€€The€standard€of€review€in€this€court€is€the€same€as€itÐ øH Ðis€in€the€chancery€court.€€òòSeeóó€òòTerminix€Intððl€Co.€v.€Tennessee€Depððt€of€Laboróó,€77€S.W.3d€185,€191Ð ä4 Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€2001),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó€(Tenn.€2002).Ð Ð  ÐÌà@««!ìàò òòòAdequacy€of€NoticeˆÐ ¨ø ÐÌà  àóóó óBoth€Article€I,€Section€8€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€and€the€Due€Process€Clause€of€theÐ €Ð ÐFourteenth€Amendment€to€the€United€States€Constitution€prohibit€the€State€from€taking€propertyÐ l¼ Ðwithout€due€process€of€law.€€òòState€v.€AAA€Aaronððs€Action€Agency€Bail€Bonds,€Inc.óó,€993€S.W.2d€81,Ð X ¨ Ð85€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1998)€(citing€òòCleveland€Bd.€of€Educ.€v.€Loudermillóó,€470€U.S.€532,€542,€105Ð D!” ÐS.€Ct.€1487,€1493,€84€L.€Ed.€2d€494€(1985)).€€At€a€minimum,€due€process€requires€that€parties€havingÐ 0"€  Ðan€interest€in€property€be€given€adequate€notice€and€a€meaningful€opportunity€to€be€heard.€€òòRedd€v.Ð #l! ÐTennessee€Depððt€of€Safetyóó,€895€S.W.2d€332,€334€(Tenn.€1995);€òòCooper€v.€Williamson€County€Bd.Ð $X" Ðof€Educ.óó,€803€S.W.2d€200,€202€(Tenn.€1990),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€500€U.S.€916,€111€S.€Ct.€2013,€114€L.€Ed.Ð ô$D # Ð2d€100€(1991).€€To€satisfy€due€process,€the€notice€given€must€be€one€that€is€ð ðððreasonably€calculatedÐ à%0!$ Ðunder€all€the€circumstances,ðððð€to€apprise€interested€parties€of€the€forfeiture€proceedings.€€òòMcClellanÐ Ì&"% Ðv.€Bd.€of€Regents€of€State€Universityóó,€921€S.W.2d€684,€688€(Tenn.€1996)€(quoting€òòMullane€v.Ð ¸'#& ÐCentral€Hanover€Bank€&€Trust€Co.óó,€339€U.S.€306,€314,€70€S.€Ct.€652,€657,€94€L.€Ed.€865€(1950)).€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐThus,€ð ðthe€means€employed€should€equal€or€exceed€that€which€one€desirous€of€actually€informingÐ )à$( Ðthe€opposite€party€would€employ.ðð€òòAAA€Aaronððs€Action€Agencyóó,€993€S.W.2d€at€86€(citing€òòTurk€v.Ð |*Ì%) ÐFranklin€Special€School€Dist.óó,€640€S.W.2d€218,€220€(Tenn.€1982)).€òòóó€Ð h+¸&* Їà  àWhen€the€State€either€knows€or€could€easily€ascertain€the€identity€of€a€party€with€an€interestÐ ° Ðin€the€proceedings,€it€must€satisfy€a€more€stringent€notice€standard,€which€at€a€minimum€requiresÐ œì Ðnotification€by€mail.€€òòSeeóó€€òòMullaneóó,€339€U.S.€at€317„18,€70€S.€Ct.€at€658„59;€òòSchroeder€v.€City€ofÐ ˆØ ÐNew€Yorkóó,€371€U.S.€208,€212„13,€83€S.€Ct.€279,€282,€9€L.€Ed.€2d€255€(1962);€òòBaggett€v.€Baggettóó,Ð tÄ Ð541€S.W.2d€407,€410€(Tenn.€1976);€òòLove€v.€First€Natððl€Bank€of€Clarksvilleóó,€646€S.W.2d€163,€165Ð `° Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1982).òòóó€€The€Department€correctly€notes€that€due€process€may€be€satisfied€even€if€theÐ L œ Ðpotential€claimant€does€not€actually€receive€the€notice.€€ð ðAn€otherwise€valid€notice€that€has€beenÐ 8 ˆ Ðmailed€is€effective€even€if€the€addressee€has€not€actually€received€or€read€the€notice.€.€.€.€€Thus,€noticeÐ $ t Ðby€certified€mail€is€sufficient€even€if€the€addressee€fails€or€refuses€to€accept€the€notice.ðð€€òòHelms€v.Ð  ` ÐGreeneóó,€No.€01A01„9505„CH„00194,€1997€WL€36846,€at€*3€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Jan.€31,€1997)Ð ü L  Ð(citations€omitted),€òòaffððd€on€other€grounds€by€òòóóHelms€v.€Tennessee€Depððt€of€Safetyóó,€987€S.W.2d€545Ð è 8  Ð(Tenn.€1999).€€However,€sending€notice€by€mail€to€a€partyððs€last€known€address€is€not€ordinarilyÐ Ô$  Ðsufficient€when€òòóóthe€State€is€aware€that€the€address€is€no€longer€valid€and€could€easily€obtain€theÐ À  Ðcurrent€address.€€òòId.óó€€As€the€òòHelmsóó€court€stated:€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThe€reasonableness€of€the€governmentððs€notification€efforts€dependsÐ „Ô  Ðon€(1)€its€knowledge€of€the€ownership€of€the€property,€(2)€the€meansÐ pÀ Ðavailable€to€the€government€to€ascertain€the€identity€of€persons€whoÐ \¬ Ðmight€claim€an€interest€in€the€property,€and€(3)òò€óóthe€practical€difficultyÐ H˜ Ðof€giving€notice€in€a€way€that€will€actually€inform€the€affected€personsÐ 4„ Ðof€the€pending€proceeding.€€Ð p` x` x ÐÌòòId.óó€at€*2€(citing€òòBrown€v.€Tennessee€Depððt€of€Safetyóó,€No.€01„A„01„9102„CH00043,€1992€WL€63444,Ð øH Ðat€*4€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Apr.€1,€1992)).€€Ð ä4 ÐÌÓ6°,X„X –X°,XƒX" –X6Óà  àWe€agree€with€the€trial€court€that€the€Departmentððs€notice€was€insufficient€to€satisfy€dueÐ ¼  Ðprocess€under€the€facts€and€circumstances€of€this€case.€€As€the€trial€court€observed,€the€DepartmentÐ ¨ø Ðknew€the€address€on€the€vehicleððs€certificate€of€title€and€registration€was€invalid€when€the€certifiedÐ ”ä Ðletter€was€returned€marked€by€the€Postal€Service€as€Ó:°,XƒX" –X°,X„X –X£G:Óð ðNot€Deliverable€as€Addressed€Unable€toÐ €Ð ÐForward.ðð€€Since€the€Department€was€also€aware€that€the€vehicleððs€owner€was€a€corporation€thatÐ l¼ Ðleased€vehicles€to€individuals,€it€had€a€readily€available€means€of€seeking€the€correct€address€throughÐ X ¨ Ðthe€Secretary€of€Stateððs€Office,€which€would€have€required€only€minimal€effort€and€little€or€noÐ D!” Ðexpense.€€Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àThe€Department€relies€on€òòBeazley€v.€Armouróó,€420€F.€Supp.€503€(M.D.€Tenn.€1976),€asÐ $X" Ðsupport€for€its€argument€that€mailing€a€certified€letter€to€a€partyððs€last€known€address€is€sufficient€toÐ ô$D # Ðsatisfy€due€process€when€the€party€has€failed€to€comply€with€a€law€requiring€it€to€update€its€address.€Ð à%0!$ ÐIn€òòBeazleyóó,€the€Tennessee€Department€of€Safety€revoked€the€driverððs€license€of€a€Tennessee€residentÐ Ì&"% Ðafter€mailing€notice€of€the€impending€revocation€to€his€last€known€address.€€òòId.óó€at€509„10.€€As€in€theÐ ¸'#& Ðinstant€case,€the€notice€was€returned€to€the€Department€undelivered€because€the€driver€had€movedÐ ¤(ô#' Ðand€failed€to€comply€with€the€statute€requiring€him€to€notify€the€Department€within€ten€days€of€anyÐ )à$( Ðchange€of€address.€€òòId.óó€at€510.€€The€federal€district€court€concluded€the€notice€provided€was€sufficientÐ |*Ì%) Ðto€satisfy€due€process,€notwithstanding€the€return€of€the€unopened€letter€to€the€Department,€becauseÐ h+¸&* Ðit€was€the€driverððs€own€neglect€in€failing€to€inform€the€Department€of€his€current€address€whichÐ ° Ðprevented€him€from€receiving€actual€notice€in€the€case.€€òòId.ó󀀀Рœì ÐÌà  àThis€court,€however,€has€reached€a€different€result€in€tax€forfeiture€cases€where€the€partiesÐ tÄ Ðfailed€to€comply€with€a€law€requiring€them€to€maintain€their€current€addresses€on€file€with€theÐ `° Ðproperty€assessorððs€office.€€In€òòSunburst€Bank€v.€Pattersonóó,€971€S.W.2d€1€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1997),€theÐ L œ Ðwestern€section€of€this€court€concluded€that€constructive€notice€of€a€tax€sale€was€insufficient€toÐ 8 ˆ Ðsatisfy€due€process€in€spite€of€the€failure€of€the€property€owners€and€mortgagee€bank€to€comply€withÐ $ t Ða€statute€in€effect€at€the€time€of€the€sale,€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€67„5„2502,€whichÐ  ` Ðprovided€that€any€party€with€an€interest€in€real€property€who€was€not€in€possession€of€the€propertyÐ ü L  Ðwaived€its€right€to€notice€unless€it€filed€an€annual€statement€containing€its€name€and€address€withÐ è 8  Ðthe€property€assessorððs€office.€€òòId.óó€at€3„5.€€The€property€owners€in€òòSunburstóó€òòóóhad€leased€their€houseÐ Ô$  Ðto€a€third€party.€€òòId.óó€at€2.€€Both€the€warranty€deed€and€the€trust€deed,€on€file€with€the€Shelby€CountyÐ À  ÐRegister€of€Deeds,€directed€the€Shelby€County€Assessor€of€Property€and€the€Shelby€County€TrusteeÐ ¬ü  Ðto€mail€tax€notices€to€the€bank€that€held€the€mortgage,€whose€address€was€on€the€deeds.€€òòId.óó€at€5.€Ð ˜è  ÐInstead,€the€Shelby€County€Trustee€sent€the€delinquent€tax€notices€to€the€property€address,€followedÐ „Ô  Ðby€publication€of€the€pending€tax€sale€in€a€county€newspaper.€€òòId.óó€at€2.€€The€trial€court€found€that€theÐ pÀ Ðnotice€given€was€insufficient€to€satisfy€due€process€and€overturned€the€tax€sale.€€In€affirming€the€trialÐ \¬ Ðcourt,€the€òòSunburst€óócourt€applied€òòMennonite€Bd.€of€Missions€v.€Adamsóó,€462€U.S.€791,€103€S.€Ct.Ð H˜ Ð2706,€77€L.€Ed.€2d€180€(1983),€quoting€from€it€as€follows:€€Ð 4„ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àð ðNotice€by€mail€or€other€means€as€certain€to€ensure€actual€notice€is€aÐ  \ Ðminimum€constitutional€precondition€to€a€proceeding€which€willÐ øH Ðadversely€affect€the€liberty€or€property€interests€of€òòany€óóparty,€whetherÐ ä4 Ðunlettered€or€well€versed€in€commercial€practice,€if€its€name€andÐ Ð  Ðaddress€are€reasonably€ascertainable.€€Furthermore,€a€mortgageeððsÐ ¼  Ðknowledge€of€delinquency€in€the€payment€of€taxes€is€not€equivalentÐ ¨ø Ðto€notice€that€a€tax€sale€is€pending.ðð€€Ð”ä` x` x ÐòòÌId.óó€at€5€(quoting€òòMennoniteóó,€462€U.S.€at€799„800,€103€S.€Ct.€at€2712).€€The€òòSunburstóó€court€furtherÐ l¼ Ðnoted€that,€according€to€the€òòMennoniteóó€Court,€ð ððða€partyððs€ability€to€take€steps€to€safeguard€itsÐ X ¨ Ðinterests€does€not€relieve€the€State€of€its€constitutional€obligation.ðððð€€òòId.óó€(quotingòòóó€òòMennoniteóó,€462Ð D!” ÐU.S.€at€799,€103€S.€Ct.€at€2712).€€Thus,€the€òòSunburstóó€court€concluded€that€because€the€currentÐ 0"€  Ðaddresses€of€the€parties€having€an€interest€in€the€property€were€reasonably€ascertainable,€theÐ #l! Ðconstructive€notice€provided€did€not€satisfy€due€process.€€òòId.óó;€òòsee€alsoóó€òòWarmath€v.€Payneóó,€3€S.W.3dÐ $X" Ð487,€492€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1999)€(concluding€that€constructive€notice€of€tax€sale€was€insufficient€toÐ ô$D # Ðsatisfy€due€process€where€property€ownersðð€names€and€addresses€were€ð ðreasonably€ascertainableðð);Ð à%0!$ ÐòòFreeman€v.€City€of€Kingsportóó,€926€S.W.2d€247,€250€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1996)€(noting€that€standard€ofÐ Ì&"% Ðproviding€notice€in€tax€lien€cases€is€one€of€ð ðreasonableness,ðð€requiring€ð ðdiligent€inquiry€to€locate€andÐ ¸'#& Ðnotify€the€owners€of€the€property€of€the€suit€to€enforce€the€tax€lienðð).€òòóóÐ ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àThe€western€section€of€this€court€reached€the€same€conclusion€in€a€similar€case€involving€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðtax€sale€of€real€property€in€which€certified€letters€containing€notice€of€the€tax€sale€were€returnedÐ h+¸&* Ðbecause€the€forwarding€service€had€expired.€€In€òòRomans€v.€Tatumóó,€No.€01A01„9806„CV„00274,Ð ° Ð1999€WL€€415175,€at€*1€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€June€23,€1999),€two€certified€letters€containing€notice€ofÐ œì Ða€countyððs€lawsuit€for€delinquent€taxes€and€of€the€pending€tax€sale€of€the€property€were€sent€to€theÐ ˆØ Ðproperty€owner€at€the€last€address€on€file€with€the€tax€assessorððs€office.€€òòóóBoth€certified€letters€wereÐ tÄ Ðreturned€marked€by€the€Postal€Service,€respectively,€as€ð ðForwarding€Order€Expiredðð€and€ð ðReturn€toÐ `° Ðsender.€€Forwarding€address€expired.ðð€€òòId.óó€€Notice€of€the€tax€sale€was€then€published€in€a€countyÐ L œ Ðnewspaper,€followed€by€the€sale€of€the€property€to€an€individual€named€Tatum.€€òòId.óó€at€**1„2.€€TheÐ 8 ˆ Ðtrial€court€overturned€the€tax€sale€based€on€the€countyððs€failure€to€provide€actual€notice€to€theÐ $ t Ðproperty€owner€and€the€mortgagee€bank,€ð ðdespite€the€fact€that€their€addresses€were€readilyÐ  ` Ðascertainable.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€*2.€€The€western€section€of€this€court€affirmed,€concluding€that,€given€the€factÐ ü L  Ðthat€the€names€and€addresses€of€both€the€owner€and€the€bank€were€ð ðreasonably€ascertainableððÐ è 8  Ðthrough€a€title€search€of€the€property,€ð ðnotice€by€publication€did€not€satisfy€constitutional€due€processÐ Ô$  Ðrequirements.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€*4.€€In€so€doing,€the€court€òòóórejected€Tatumððs€argument€that€notice€by€publicationÐ À  Ðwas€sufficient€because€the€property€owner€and€the€bank€had€both€failed€to€comply€with€TennesseeÐ ¬ü  ÐCode€Annotated€section€67„5„2502,€which€placed€the€burden€on€them€to€register€their€names€andÐ ˜è  Ðaddresses€with€the€property€assessor.€€òòId.óó€at€**2„4.€òòóó€Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àIn€addition€to€òòBeazley€v.€Armouróó,€the€Department€cites€cases€from€Utah,€California,€andÐ \¬ ÐNorth€Carolina€as€support€for€its€contention€that€TMCCððs€failure€to€comply€with€the€law€requiringÐ H˜ Ðit€to€maintain€its€current€address€on€file€with€the€Department€relieved€the€Department€of€any€ð ðdutyÐ 4„ Ðto€hunt€TMCC€down.ðð€€òòSeeóó€òòAnderson€v.€Pub.€Serv.€Commððn€of€Utahóó,€839€P.2d€822€(Utah€1992)Ð  p Ð(affirming€public€service€commissionððs€revocation€of€limousine€service€ownerððs€certificate€ofÐ  \ Ðoperation€for€failure€to€maintain€proof€of€insurance€and€rejecting€ownerððs€argument€he€was€entitledÐ øH Ðto€actual€notice);òòóó€òòBaughman€v.€Medical€Bd.€of€Californiaóó,€46€Cal.€Rptr.€2d€498€(Cal.€Ct.€App.€1995)Ð ä4 Ð(affirming€medical€boardððs€revocation€of€physicianððs€license€to€practice€medicine€followingÐ Ð  Ðphysicianððs€failure€to€answer€allegation€of€misconduct);€òòEvans€v.€Depððt€of€Motor€Vehiclesóó,€26€Cal.Ð ¼  ÐRptr.€2d€460€(Cal.€Ct.€App.€1994)€(affirming€department€of€motor€vehicleððs€revocation€of€automobileÐ ¨ø Ðdismantlerððs€license€for€violation€of€various€state€statutes€and€regulations€governing€suchÐ ”ä Ðbusinesses);€òòState€v.€Teasleyóó,€176€S.E.2d€838€(N.C.€Ct.€App.€1970)€(affirming€defendantððs€convictionÐ €Ð Ðfor€speeding€and€driving€while€license€suspended€and€concluding€that€defendant€was€given€sufficientÐ l¼ Ðnotice€of€suspension€of€license€).€€These€cases,€however,€are€readily€distinguishable€from€the€factsÐ X ¨ Ðof€the€instant€case.€€Unlike€the€situation€here,€none€of€the€out„of„state€cases€cited€by€the€DepartmentÐ D!” Ðinvolve€the€forfeiture€of€property€belonging€to€an€innocent€party€who€was€totally€unaware€of€theÐ 0"€  Ðconduct€leading€to€the€forfeiture€and€whose€only€fault€lay€in€failing€to€maintain€a€listing€of€its€currentÐ #l! Ðaddress.€€Furthermore,€in€at€least€three€of€the€cases€cited,€there€is€the€suggestion€that€the€partyððsÐ $X" Ðfailure€to€receive€notice€sent€by€certified€mail€resulted€from€its€deliberate€attempt€to€avoid€notice.€Ð ô$D # Ѐ€òòSeeóó€òòAndersonóó,€839€P.2d€at€823,€826€(observing€that€Anderson€failed€to€claim€his€certified€letteròòóó€andÐ à%0!$ Ðconcluding€that€ð ðthe€agency€also€has€a€significant€interest€in€ensuring€that€parties€do€not€delay€orÐ Ì&"% Ðsubvert€the€administrative€process€by€willfully€evading€noticeðð);€òòBaughmanóó€46€Cal.€Rptr.€2d€at€500Ð ¸'#& Ð(noting€Baughmanððs€conflicting€claims€that€he€did€not€receive€the€notice€sent€by€certified€mailÐ ¤(ô#' Ðbecause€ð ðððthe€girl€picking€up€the€mail€at€that€time€didnððt€understand€the€notices,ðððð€and€that€he€didÐ )à$( Ðâ ânot€pick€up€the€certified€letter€because€he€had€been€receiving€ð ðharassing€type€mail€from€a€medicalÐ |*Ì%) Ðmanufacturerðð);€òòEvansóó,€26€Cal.€Rptr.€2d€at€460€(noting€that€person€residing€at€Evansðð€place€ofÐ ° Ðbusiness€received€notice€but€allegedly€failed€to€give€it€to€Evans).€€Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àAdequate€notice€is€an€essential€element€of€due€process,€and€the€burden€is€on€the€State€toÐ tÄ Ðsatisfy€due€process.€€òòRedd€v.€Tennessee€Depððt€of€Safetyóó,€895€S.W.2d€332,€335€(Tenn.€1995)€(citingÐ `° ÐòòGreene€v.€Lindseyóó,€456€U.S.€444,€449,€102€S.€Ct.€1874,€1877„78,€72€L.€Ed.€2d€249€(1982)).€€ð ðNoticeÐ L œ Ðmust€be€given€in€a€manner€reasonably€calculated€to€notify€all€interested€parties€of€the€pendingÐ 8 ˆ Ðforfeiture€of€the€property€in€order€to€afford€the€opportunity€to€object€to€the€Stateððs€taking.ðð€€òòId.óó€atÐ $ t Ð334„35.€€If,€as€here,€the€State€both€knows€the€name€of€the€property€owner€and€that€the€address€toÐ  ` Ðwhich€it€has€sent€notice€is€no€longer€valid,€due€process€requires€that€it€make€an€effort€to€ascertain€andÐ ü L  Ðnotify€the€property€owner€at€a€valid€address.€€No€such€effort€was€made€in€this€case,€despite€the€factÐ è 8  Ðthat€TMCCððs€address€was€reasonably€ascertainable€through€a€telephone€call€to€the€Secretary€ofÐ Ô$  ÐStateððs€Office€or€a€search€of€its€web€site.€€Because€the€Department€failed€to€exert€the€minimal€effortÐ À  Ðrequired€to€ascertain€TMCCððs€correct€address,€TMCC€was€deprived€of€the€opportunity€to€be€presentÐ ¬ü  Ðat€a€hearing€to€assert€its€claim€to€the€vehicle.€€Therefore,€we€conclude€the€trial€court€was€correct€inÐ ˜è  Ðfinding€that€the€notice€provided€failed€to€satisfy€due€process€and€in€remanding€the€case€to€theÐ „Ô  ÐCommissioner€of€Safety€to€conduct€a€hearing€on€TMCCððs€claim€to€the€vehicle.€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€to€theÐ H˜ ÐDepartment€and€its€surety,€for€which€execution€may€issue,€if€necessary.€€Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àÌà  àà ` àà " àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð øH Ðà  àà ` àà " àà  àà h àà À àà  àALAN€E.€GLENN,€SPECIAL€JUDGE