25-003208 Partial Dismiss Default.pdf

Eusebio Cabanas-Martinez, Petitioner V City Of Detroit, Respondent · 25-003208-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 

Eusebio Cabanas-Martinez, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003208 

 

City of Detroit, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL 

 

ORDER PLACING PETITIONER IN DEFAULT 

 

The Tribunal has considered the file in this case and finds that Petitioner filed this 

appeal on June 21, 2025, disputing the true cash and taxable values and the principal 

residence exemption (PRE) status of Parcel Nos. 16011461 and 16011483. The 

petition indicates in pertinent part that the subject properties “should qualify” for the 

PRE. However, it is not clear from the record whether Petitioner submitted an affidavit 

claiming the PRE to the city assessor’s office.1 The Tribunal’s authority is limited to 

direct review of a final decision of a taxing agency and does not include a right of direct 

application.2 Further, the petition indicates that the appeal arises from a March BOR 

decision. However, that board has no authority over a PRE determination, which is 

under the exclusive authority of the assessor’s office. Additionally, even if there was a 

final decision by Respondent, that decision cannot be heard in the same case as a 

valuation appeal and must instead be filed using the Petition for Denial of PRE. As a 

result, this case is partially dismissed with respect to the PRE claim and shall continue 

only for the valuation claim. 

 

With respect to the valuation appeal, Petitioner shall be placed in default for the 

following issues. Petitioner failed to properly complete Section 7 of the valuation 

petition, including the values set by the BOR. Petitioner failed to complete the multi-

parcel attachment form required when more than one contiguous parcel is being 

appealed in a single valuation case. The multi-parcel attachment is limited to parcels 

with common ownership. Petitioner is required to submit the notices giving rise to the 

appeal, which are the decisions of the March BOR for each parcel.3 It is also unclear 

from the petition whether a filing fee is owed. The petition filing fee for a residential 

property in the Small Claims division is $125, plus an additional $25 filing fee for each 

additional parcel.4 However, that fee is waived when the properties at issue have a 

 

1 See MCL 211.7cc(2). 

2 See MCL 205.731. 

3 TTR 279(3). 

4 TTR 269(3)(a).

MTT Docket No. 25-003208 

Page 2 of 2 

 

PRE of at least 50% as of the date the petition is filed.5 Here, Petitioner checked the 

box on the petition indicating that the properties have a PRE of at least 50%, but the 

reason for appeal indicates that the properties do not have a PRE. If there was no PRE 

as of the date the petition was filed, Petitioner is required to pay the petition filing fee for 

the valuation appeal. Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that this case is PARTIALLY DISMISSED with respect to Petitioner’s 

PRE claim. The appeal shall continue for Petitioner’s valuation claim. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is PLACED IN DEFAULT. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner must complete the following to cure the 

default: (1) submit an amended petition, including a completed Section 7; (2) submit the 

multi-parcel attachment form; (3) submit the notices giving rise to the appeal, and (4) 

submit the required petition filing fee, if necessary. The foregoing must be filed within 

14 days of this order. 

 

Failure to comply with this order shall result in Petitioner being required to submit a 

motion to set aside the default (with motion filing fee, if required).6 

 

 

 

Entered: September 2, 2025 

 

 

By _____________________________ 

bw/am 

 

 

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 provided by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives. 

 

By: Tribunal Clerk 

 

5 TTR 269(1). 

6 TTR 237.

← View full record