24-003452 Recon.pdf

Brian E Mull, Petitioner V City Of Albion, Respondent · 24-003452-TT

← View full record

Text extracted from the reviewed PDF, organized by page. OCR and reading order may contain errors; confirm details in the PDF below.

STATE OF MICHIGAN

 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

GOVERNOR 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR 

 

 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL · 611 W. OTTAWA ST., LANSING, MI 48933 · 517-335-9760 

PO BOX 30232, LANSING, MI 48909 · Other Carriers: 2407 N. GRAND RIVER AVE., LANSING, MI 48906 

Brian E Mull, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 24-003452 

 

City of Albion, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Marcus L. Abood 

 

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

 

On October 8, 2024, Petitioner filed a motion requesting that the Tribunal reconsider the 

Order of Dismissal (order) entered in this case on September 17, 2024.1 In the motion, 

Petitioner states that the petition was not mailed until June 1, 2024 due to a Tribunal e-

filing outage on May 31, 2024. 

 

The Tribunal has considered the motion and the case file and finds that Petitioner has 

not shown good cause to reinstate the case. The deadline for the filing of Petitioner’s 

petition in this case was May 31, 2024.2 The Tribunal has no equitable power to waive 

or otherwise disregard a statutory filing deadline.3 Petitioner relies on TTR 219 in 

support of the Tribunal taking jurisdiction over the appeal. However, contrary to 

Petitioner’s assertion, the Tribunal e-filing system did not incur a systemwide outage on 

May 31, 2024. Any outage experienced by Petitioner was caused by another factor, 

and TTR 219 is not applicable in this instance to the extension of the Tribunal filing 

deadline. 

 

Given the above, Petitioner has failed to demonstrate a palpable error relative to the 

order that misled the Tribunal and the parties and that would have resulted in a different 

disposition if the error was corrected.4 

 

Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED. 

 

This Order resolves all pending claims in this matter and closes this case. 

 

 

1 The Tribunal issued notices of no action on October 14 and October 23, 2024 because Petitioner did not 

submit the motion filing fee or proof of service of the motion upon Respondent. Petitioner responded to 

the notices with the missing items, and Petitioner’s motion is therefore properly pending. 

2 MCL 205.735a(6). 

3 The Tribunal’s powers are limited to those authorized by statute and do not include powers of equity. 

See Federal-Mogul Corp v Dep’t of Treasury, 161 Mich App 346 (1987), Elec Data Sys Corp v Flint Twp, 

253 Mich App 538 (2002), and VanderWerp v Plainfield Twp, 278 Mich App 624 (2008). 

4 See MCR 2.119.

MTT Docket No. 24-003452 

Page 2 of 2 

 

APPEAL RIGHTS 

 

If you disagree with the final decision in this case, you may file a claim of appeal with 

the Michigan Court of Appeals. If the claim is filed within 21 days of the entry of the final 

decision, it is an “appeal of right.” If the claim is filed more than 21 days after the entry 

of the final decision, it is an “appeal by leave.” A copy of the claim of appeal must be 

filed with the Tribunal to certify the record on appeal. There is no certification fee. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By 

 

 

Entered: November 21, 2024 

bw/jcr 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

I certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent on the entry date indicated above to the 

parties or their attorneys or authorized representatives, if any, utilizing either the mailing 

or email addresses on file, as provide by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives. 

 

By: Tribunal Clerk

← View full record