Answer Woodingham Properties- 26-000706.pdf

Woodington Properties LLC Petitioner Vs. City Of Detroit Respondent · 26-000706-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.

1 

 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 WOODINGHAM PROPERTIES, LLC 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

 

 

 

v 

CITY OF DETROIT, 

 

 

 

Docket No. 26- 000706 

 

Respondent 

 

 

 

 

Parcel No. 16009357-8 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

and additional parcels 

____________________________________________________________________________/ 

ANSWER TO PETITION and 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

Now Comes Respondent, City of Detroit, by and through it undersigned counsel and in Answer 

to the Petition filed in this matter states the following: 

 

 

1. Respondent, City of Detroit, neither admits nor denies and leaves Petitioner to its 

proofs. 

2. Respondent admits as true. 

3. Respondent admits as true. 

4. Respondent admits as true. 

5. Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth 

of the allegations contained in this paragraph and therefore leaves Petitioner to its 

proofs. 

6. Respondent admits.

2 

 

7. Respondent admits that this appeal contains issues of true cash and taxable values 

for assessment purposes of the subject property, although Petitioner does not believe 

that this appeal involves issues of “additions” or “losses, but reserves the right to 

assert said issues. Respondent reserves the right to property respond, should 

Petitioner raise said issues. 

8. Respondent admits as true. 

9. Respondent admits as true as a, b, and c of the corresponding paragraph. 

10. Petitioner denies the allegations in the corresponding paragraph, including sub – 

paragraphs a-d. 

 

 

CONCLUSION and REQUEST FOR RELIEF 

Wherefore, Respondent respectfully requests that this Honorable Tribunal dismiss the 

Petition in this matter and award attorney fees and costs to Respondent. 

Dated: July 30, 2026 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/s/Mary Beth Cobbs 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By: Mary Beth Cobbs ( P40080) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kevin C. Richard ( P 43417) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Attorneys for Respondent 

 

 

 

 

 

 

City of Detroit Law Department 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 Woodward Ave., Ste. 500 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Detroit, MI 48226

3 

 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

 

NOW COMES Respondent, City of Detroit, and asserts the following Affirmative 

Defenses to the Petitioner’s claims: 

1. 

Petitioner’s lacks standing and/or capacity to bring forth this Petition. 

2. 

Petitioner’s claims may be barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 

3. 

This Tribunal lacks subject matter jurisdiction. 

 

4. 

Petitioner has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 

Wherefore, Respondent respectfully requests that this Honorable Tribunal dismiss the 

Petition in this matter and award attorney fees and costs to Respondent. 

Dated: 

July 30, 2026 

 

/s/Mary Beth Cobbs 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By: Mary Beth Cobbs ( P40080) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kevin C. Richard ( P 43417) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Attorneys for Respondent 

 

 

 

 

 

 

City of Detroit Law Department 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 Woodward Ave., Ste. 500 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Detroit, MI 48226 

 

 

 

 

 

 

313.237.3075 

 

 

 

 

 

 

cobbm@detroitmi.gov

4 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

On July 30, 2026, I mailed by first class mail a copy of Respondent’s Answer and 

Affirmative Defenses to: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Laura M. Hallahan, Esq 

 

 

 

1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202 

 

 

 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302-0179 

 

 

 

I declare that the above statement is true to the best of my information, knowledge, and 

belief. 

 

Dated: July 30,2026 

 

 

 

 

 

 /s/Mary Beth Cobbs 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mary Beth Cobbs ( P40080) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

City of Detroit Law Department 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 Woodward Ave., Ste. 500 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Detroit, MI 48226

← View full record