Grand Capital Saginaw LLC v Township of Saginaw (26-001451) Respondent's Answer to Petition.pdf
Grand Capital Saginaw LLC Petitioner Vs. Township Of Saginaw Respondent · 26-001451-TT
Text extracted from the reviewed PDF, organized by page. OCR and reading order may contain errors; confirm details in the PDF below.
Page 1
STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL GRAND CAPITAL SAGINAW LLC, Petitioner, MTT Docket No.: 26-001451 Vv TOWNSHIP OF SAGINAW, Respondent. LAW OFFICES OF AARON M. FALES, P.C. BRAUN KENDRICK FINKBEINER P.L.C. By: Aaron M. Fales (P72864) By: Francis J. Keating (P39223) Attorney Petitioner Attorneys for Respondent 330 Hamilton Row, Suite 350 4301 Fashion Square Blvd. Birmingham, MI 48009 Saginaw, MI 48603 (248) 767-9840 (989) 498-2100 afaleslaw(@gmail.com frakea@braunkendrick.com RESPONDENT’S ANSWER TO PETITION NOW COMES Respondent, Township of Saginaw, by and through its attorneys, Braun Kendrick Finkbeiner P.L.C., and for its Answer to Petition states the following: 1. Respondent admits that real property tax parcel no., 23-12-4-20-2025-000 is also known as 5775 State Street, and is located in Saginaw County, Michigan. Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in paragraph 1. 2. Admitted. 3. Admitted. 4. Respondent admits that the property is classified as Commercial Real, and that Petitioner’s Property is commercial property. Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the remaining allegations in paragraph 4. 4917-9855-6885, v. 1
Page 2
5. Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 5. 6. Respondent lacks knowledge of information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 6. 7. Respondent denies as untrue the allegations in paragraph 7. 7a. Respondent denies as untrue the allegations in paragraph 7a. 7b. Respondent denies as untrue the allegations in paragraph 7b. Te. Respondent denies as untrue the allegations in paragraph 7c. 7d. Respondent denies as untrue the allegations in paragraph 7d. NEW MATTERS AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 1. Petitioner has failed to allege specific and sufficient facts to set forth a cause of action against Respondent. 2. Petitioner has failed to allege specific and sufficient facts to establish fraud, discrimination, or illegality on the part of the Respondent. 3. Petitioner may not be the real party in interest to bring this tax appeal. 4. Petitioner may not have standing to bring this tax appeal. S. Petitioner has failed to show that any factor other than fifty percent (50%) was applied to the true cash value of Petitioner’s property, as well as all others, to arrive at the respective assessments appearing on the roll, and also fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to support its allegations that the property’s taxable value is improper. 6. Respondent has properly and lawfully assessed Petitioner's property and established its taxable value in accordance with statutory and constitutional requirements, 4917-9855-6885, v. 1
Page 3
75 Respondent reserves the right to assert additional affirmative defenses during the pendency of this action. WHEREFORE, Respondent, Township of Saginaw, respectfully requests that this Honorable Tribunal provide it with the following relief: A. Dismiss the Petition with prejudice, and award Respondent its costs and attorney fees wrongfully incurred in the defense of this action; and B. Provide Respondent with such other relief as the Tribunal deems appropriate. BRAUN KENDRICK FINKBE PLC Dated: October & 2026 BY: FRANCISJ. KEATING (P39223) Attorney for Respondent 4917-9855-6885, v. 1