On appeal, Rehoboth woman wins new trial over sheriff’s sale of property

The U.S. Third Circuit appeals court has remanded the case of a former Rehoboth Beach property owner back to U.S. District Court in Wilmington. 

Sandra Harmon, now of Hartsville, S.C., has for years waged legal battle with Sussex County Department of Finance, county assistant attorney Jason Adkins, Sussex County Board of Adjustment and Sussex County administration.

Harmon says the demolition of a family home on Oyster House Road and a sheriff sale of the property violates her constitutional rights. She had inherited the property as an heir to LeRoy William Harmon. 

In January 2018, the county placed the property on its docket for nonpayment of $3,021 in back sewer and water charges and an $11,379 judgement for a demolition lien for the property. Due to an earlier fire, the house had been condemned; it was eventually demolished by the county Sept. 14, 2017. Harmon says she was willing to pay $100 per month toward the demolition costs, but stopped payments pending a ruling from the U.S. District Court case she had filed.

Within 32 days of demolition, she says, she received notice attempting to collect the total amount with more than $1,300 interest added. In court documents, she says none of the defendants filed a complaint in Superior Court to recover any costs.

“With the high cost noted in the demolition, at the rate given, the monthly payment would be well over $1,000, clearly unreasonable and unheard of,” she said.

Harmon wants the court to award her $1 million for emotional distress and violations of her constitutional rights to due process and equal protection under the law. She also seeks to rescind the sheriff’s sale and that the county allow her to make payments if the court determines she is responsible for demolition costs.

The county sought to dismiss the case; the U.S. District Court ruled Aug. 20, 2019, in the county’s favor, and then denied Harmon reconsideration Oct. 7 of that same year.

Harmon appealed to the Third Circuit Court, which on April 27, vacated the district court’s ruling and remanded the matter back to the lower court. 

In its decision, the Third Circuit court said the district court failed to apply the proper standard for review, but did not rule on whether Harmon’s claims have merit or whether the defendants have other meritorious defenses.

"The county is reviewing the latest development, but cannot comment at this time as this remains pending litigation,” said Chip Guy, Sussex County director of communications.

Harmon said, “I am grateful that the Third Circuit nailed the basis for which I filed my complaint in its April 27 ruling, which the district court appeared oblivious to.”