25-002950 Recon Grant and Reinstate Consolidate.pdf

Lake Forest Trail Holdings LLC, Petitioner Vs. Township Of Green Oak, Respondent · 25-002950-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 

Lake Forest Trail Holdings LLC, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket Nos. 25-001257 & 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 25-002950 

 

Green Oak Township, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

 

ORDER REINSTATING CASE 

 

ORDER OF CONSOLIDATION 

 

ORDER REMOVING MTT DOCKET NO. 25-001257 FROM JUNE 16 – 30, 2026 

PREHEARING GENERAL CALL 

 

On August 22, 2025, Petitioner filed a motion requesting that the Tribunal reconsider the 

Order of Dismissal entered in MTT Docket No. 25-002950 on August 20, 2025. In the 

motion, Petitioner states it filed a petition in MTT Docket No. 25-001257 on May 22, 

2025, challenging the subject property’s true cash, assessed, and taxable values for tax 

year 2025. However, on June 30, 2025, Petitioner received a notice of uncapping from 

Respondent stating that the subject property’s taxable value uncapped for tax year 2024 

due to an alleged transfer of ownership. As a result, Petitioner filed the subject appeal 

on July 30, 2025, to appeal the uncapping within 35 days of the notice.1 Thus, 

Petitioner asserts that the Tribunal made a palpable error by dismissing this appeal as a 

duplicative matter to MTT Docket No. 25-001257 since each docket pertains to a 

separate issue, despite regarding the same subject parcel. 

 

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

demonstrated a palpable error relative to the Order of Dismissal that misled the Tribunal 

and the parties and that would have resulted in a different disposition if the error was 

corrected.2 Specifically, while valuation appeals typically encompass both taxable value 

and uncapping claims, Petitioner did not have the opportunity to plead and address the 

notice of uncapping issued by Respondent in MTT Docket No. 25-001257 since the 

petition had already been filed at the time the notice of uncapping was received. As a 

result, the Tribunal erred by dismissing Petitioner’s claims regarding the uncapping of 

 

1 See, MCL 211.27b(6). 

2 See MCR 2.119(F)(3). A palpable error is one that is “easily perceptible, plain, obvious, readily visible, 

noticeable, patent, distinct, or manifest.” Luckow v Luckow, 291 Mich App 417, 426 (2011) (quotation 

marks and citation omitted).

MTT Docket Nos. 25-001257 & 25-002950 

Page 2 of 3 

 

the taxable value of the subject parcel as they were timely filed in MTT Docket No. 25-

002950. Thus, the appeals are not duplicative in nature, and MTT 25-002950 should 

not have been dismissed as such. 

 

Further, the Tribunal has reviewed the files in MTT Docket Nos. 25-001257 and 25-

002950 and finds that it may order a consolidation of cases upon a finding of substantial 

and controlling common questions of fact or law.3 The noted dockets present common 

questions of fact and law and the parties in each of the cases are the same. As such, 

the Tribunal finds that consolidation is appropriate and will facilitate the efficient 

administration of justice. 

 

Therefore, 

 

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

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the MTT Docket No. 25-002950 is REINSTATED. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that MTT Docket Nos. 25-001257 and 25-002950 are 

CONSOLIDATED. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all future pleadings and documents filed in these 

dockets shall refer to the consolidated case as MTT Docket No. 25-001257. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner shall file proof the petition filed in MTT 

Docket No. 25-002950 was served on all parties-in-interest within 28 days of the date of 

this order. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that after Petitioner has completed service of the 

uncapping petition, Respondent shall file an amended answer addressing the claims 

from both petitions within 28 days after service of the petition for MTT Docket No. 25-

002950. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that MTT Docket No. 25-001257 is REMOVED from the 

June 16 – 30, 2026 Prehearing General Call. 

 

The consolidated matter shall be placed on a Prehearing General Call in the normal 

course of scheduling after proof of service of the petition and amended answer are filed. 

 

 

Entered: September 10, 2025 

 

 

By _____________________________ 

cs/jc 

 

 

 

 

 

3 See MCR 2.505(A).

MTT Docket Nos. 25-001257 & 25-002950 

Page 3 of 3 

 

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

← View full record