A town planned to build a new street through a parcel of vacant land on the edge of town. The land records show a deed dated October 5, 1947, to the current property owner, for whom an address is given in the capital city of the state. The town instituted an in rem condemnation action in state court, with notice to all interested parties published in the town newspaper. The property owner, who still resides at the address in the capital city, does not see the notice. The court allows the condemnation to proceed as requested by the town. Is the condemnation valid as to the property owner?
A: Yes, because a court has jurisdiction over the subject matter.
B: Yes, because notice by publication was sufficient.
C: No, because the property owner was required to be served by summons.
D: No, because the property owner should have been mailed notice of the proceeding.