Z On Ladd MTT answer affirmative defense.pdf
Z On Ladd LLC Petitioner Vs. City Of Walled Lake Respondent · 26-001296-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 ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SYSTEM MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL Z ON LADD LLC, MOAHR Docket No. 26-001296 Petitioner, v CITY OF WALLED LAKE, Respondent. ___________________________________________________________________________/ Jay A. Schwartz Representative for Petitioner 37887 W. Twelve Mile Rd. Ste B Farmington Hills, MI 48331 (248) 672-1922 jschwartz@propertytaxreductionservices.org CITY OF WALLED LAKE Vahan C. Vanerian (P48196) Representative for Respondent 1499 E. West Maple Rd. Walled Lake, MI 48390 (248) 960-8899 vvanerian@walledlake.com _____________________________________________________________________________/ RESPONDENT’S ANSWER TO PETITIONER’S PETITION NOW COMES Respondent, CITY OF WALLED LAKE, by and through its Attorney, VAHAN C VANERIAN, and for its Answer to Petitioner’s Petition, states as follows: 1. Answering paragraph 1, Respondent admits the allegations therein. 2. Answering paragraph 2, Respondent admits the allegations therein. 3. Answering paragraph 3, Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations therein for lack of sufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 4. Answering paragraph 4, Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations therein for lack of sufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief and leaves Petitioner to its proofs.
Page 2
5. Answering paragraph 5, Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations therein for lack of sufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 6. Answering paragraph 6, Respondent admits the allegations therein. 7. Answering paragraph 7, Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained therein for lack of sufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 8. Answering paragraph 8, Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained therein for lack of sufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 9. Answering paragraph 9, Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained therein for lack of sufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 10. Answering paragraph 10, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein. 11. Answering Paragraph 11, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein. 12. Answering Paragraph 12, Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained therein for lack of sufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 13. Answering Paragraph 13, Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained therein for lack of sufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 14. Answering paragraph 14, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein.
Page 3
15. Answering Paragraph 15, Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained therein for lack of sufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 16. Answering Paragraph 16, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein. 17. Answering paragraph 17, Respondent admits the petition alleges values in contention for the Subject Property but denies that Petitioner’s alleged contended values represent the actual or appropriate values for the Subject Property based on generally accepted property assessment principles and methods. 18. Answering paragraph 18, Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained therein for lack of sufficient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 19. Answering paragraph 19, Respondent denies that Petitioner is entitled to the relief requested for the reason that the values for the Subject Property as established by Respondent are reasonable and appropriate and based on generally accepted property assessment principles and methods. 20. Answering paragraph 20, Respondent denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that the same are untrue. WHEREFORE, Respondent, CITY OF WALLED LAKE, respectfully requests that the Respondent’s assessment and taxable value of the subject property be affirmed or increased, that a judgment of no cause for action be entered against Petitioner and in Respondent’s favor, and that Petitioner’s Petition be dismissed with prejudice and that Respondent be granted costs and attorney fees so wrongfully sustained. CITY OF WALLED LAKE By: /s/ Vahan C Vanerian_____ Dated: September 3, 2026 VAHAN C VANERIAN (P48196) Attorney for Respondent
Page 4
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES NOW COMES Respondent, CITY OF WALLED LAKE, and for its affirmative defenses, states as follows: 1. Petitioner fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to set forth a cause of action against Respondent and to support its claim for relief. 2. Petitioner fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to establish fraud, error of law, discrimination, application of wrong principles or illegality on the part of Respondent. 3. Petitioner fails to allege that the mode or method of appraising its property failed to conform with the mode and method applied in the case of all of the properties, and/or similarly situated properties, in the Respondent’s taxing unit for the year in question. 4. Petitioner fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to establish the true cash value, assessed value and taxable value of its property. 5. Petitioner fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to support its allegation that the assessed values of its property, as equalized, is at a factor other than 50% and also fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to support its allegations that the property’s taxable value is improper. 6. Petitioner fails to show that any rate other than 50% after equalization was applied to the true cash value of its property, as well as to the properties of all others to arrive at the respective equalized assessments. 7. Petitioner, in essence, seeks by Petition to challenge the process of county and state equalization as to which it has no legal standing and cannot maintain a cause of action. 8. Petitioner fails to allege to the Board of Review that:
Page 5
A. The equalized assessment of the property is more than 50% of its true cash value and that the taxable value is in violation of applicable statutory and constitutional limitations. B. The property is assessed in a discriminatory manner and that the assessment is a higher level of true value that the average level of assessment of all other property within the City, excepting this property and the assessment on other property which is also under appeal. C. The assessment and taxable value are unlawful and based upon the application of wrong principles and thereby operate as a constructive fraud upon the taxpayer. The failure to raise such objections to the Respondent’s Board of Review constitutes a failure to exhaust the administrative remedies provided for by the General Property Tax Act, constitutes a waiver of any such allegations contained in the Petition, and further amounts to a failure by the Petitioner to appear in protest to Respondent’s Board of Review as required by the Tax Tribunal Act. 9. Petitioner, in essence, asks that this honorable Tribunal grant it an illegal preference by application of a method of assessment different from that employed in the assessment of other properties in the Respondent’s taxing unit. 10. Any decrease in the value of Petitioner’s property was the result of its own intentional acts and/or negligence and cannot be allowed to reduce an otherwise equitable tax burden. 11. Respondent has properly and lawfully assessed Petitioner’s property and established its taxable value in accordance with statutory and constitutional requirements. 12. Petitioner has failed to pursue its appeal in a timely manner. 13. Any decrease in the value of the Petitioner’s property and/or income derived from the property is of a temporary and short-term nature due to temporary and short-term conditions
Page 6
and fluctuations and any resulting decreases in value or income are not reflective or indicative of the property’s true cash value. 14. Respondent reserves the right to add additional affirmative defenses revealed during the course of discovery. WHEREFORE, Respondent, CITY OF WALLED LAKE, denies that Petitioner is entitled to the relief it seeks and respectfully requests that the Respondent’s assessment and taxable value of the subject property be affirmed or increased and that Petitioner’s Petition be dismissed with prejudice and that Respondent be granted costs and attorney fees so wrongfully sustained. CITY OF WALLED LAKE By: /s/ Vahan C Vanerian_________ VAHAN C VANERIAN (P48196) Dated: September 3, 2026 Attorney for Respondent 1499 E. West Maple Rd. Walled Lake, MI 48390 (248) 960-8899 vvanerian@walledlake.com
Page 7
STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS MICHIGAN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SYSTEM MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL Z ON LADD LLC, MOAHR Docket No. 26-001296 Petitioner, v CITY OF WALLED LAKE, Respondent. ___________________________________________________________________________/ Jay A. Schwartz Representative for Petitioner 37887 W. Twelve Mile Rd. Ste B Farmington Hills, MI 48331 (248) 672-1922 jschwartz@propertytaxreductionservices.org CITY OF WALLED LAKE Vahan C. Vanerian (P48196) Representative for Respondent 1499 E. West Maple Rd. Walled Lake, MI 48390 (248) 960-8899 vvanerian@walledlake.com _____________________________________________________________________________/ PROOF OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that the Respondent’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses was served upon all parties to the above case as disclosed on the pleadings on September 3, 2026, via US mail and email. CITY OF WALLED LAKE __/s/ Vahan C Vanerian____ By: Vahan c. Vanerian (P48196)