Opinion ID: 2521044
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: issues

Text: 1. Did the deed from the tax assessor's office convey the County's ownership interests to the Appellants and forfeit any ownership of Hardy and Hanson? 2. Did the district court err by failing to find that Hanson had waived, abandoned or was estopped from claiming an ownership interest in the real property? 3. Did the district court err by determining Hanson's forfeiture caused by the tax deed was set aside upon the Appellants acquiring the County's interest? 4. Did the district court err by ruling the Appellants were secured parties? 5. Did the district court err in ruling that the Appellants owed a duty to Hardy, as a former owner, under a constructive trust? 6. Did the district court err in concluding that the Appellants wrongfully exercised control over the real property as deeded to them by the County, when they exercised their ownership rights? 7. Did the district court properly apply the previous orders of the district court in the case? 8. Were the default notices issued by the Appellants sufficient to call the buyer's attention to the concerns of default and make the buyer aware of the need to cure those matters within thirty days? 9. Did the district court err by finding that the Appellants waived or consented to the transfer of the licenses and permits by Hanson? 10. Did the district court err in ruling that Hanson was entitled to damages as the prevailing party under the facts of this case? 11. Did the district court err in awarding attorney fees and costs to Hanson and his assignees? 12. Are any of the parties entitled to attorney fees on appeal?