Full record / Answer, POS & Affirm Defs.pdf

Answer, POS & Affirm Defs.pdf

Statewide Macomb LLC, Petitioner Vs. Township Of Macomb, Respondent · 25-001815-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.

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATEWIDE MACOMB LLC, 

VS. 

Petitioner, 

MTT Docket No. 25-001815 

MACOMB TOWNSHIP, 

Respondent. 

AARON M. FALES (P72864) 

TIMOTHY D. TOMLINSON (P48519) 

LAW OFFICE OF AARON M. FALES P.C. 

YORK, DOLAN & TOMLINSON, P.C. 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

Attorneys for Respondent 

330 Hamilton Row, Ste. 350 

22600 Hall Road, Ste. 205 

Birmingham, MI 48009 

Clinton Twp., MI 48036 

(248) 767-9840 

(586) 263-5050 

afaleslaw@gmail.com 

ttomlinson@yorkdolanlaw.com 

RESPONDENT'S ANSWER TO PETITION 

(Entire Tribunal, 2024 Tax Year) 

NOW COMES Respondent, Macomb Township, by and through its attorneys, York, 

Dolan & Tomlinson, P.C., and in answer to Petitioner's Petition, states as follows: 

L 

Respondent neither admits nor denies paragraph 1 being without sufficient 

information to form a reasonable belief thereto. 

Respondent admits paragraph 2. 

Respondent admits paragraph 3. 

Respondent admits paragraph 4. 

Respondent denies paragraph 5 because it is untrue, leaving Petitioner to its 

proofs. 

Respondent denies paragraph 6 because it is untrue, leaving Petitioner to its 

proofs.

Page 2

7. 

Respondent denies paragraph 7 because it is untrue, leaving Petitioner to its 

proofs. 

(@ 

Respondent denies paragraph (a) because it is untrue, leaving Petitioner to 

its proofs. 

(b) 

Respondent denies paragraph (b) because it is untrue, leaving Petitioner to 

its proofs. 

(©) 

Respondent denies paragraph (c) because it is untrue, leaving Petitioner to 

its proofs. 

(d) 

Respondent denies paragraph (d) because it is untrue, leaving Petitioner to 

its proofs. 

WHEREFORE, Respondent respectfully requests that this Honorable Tribunal dismiss 

the Petition, affirm the values as determined by Respondent, and award costs and attorney fees 

wrongfully incurred in having to defend this matter. 

Respectfully submitted, 

YORK, DOLAN & TOMLINSON, P.C. 

TIMOTHY D. TOMLINSON (P48519) 

Attorneys for Respondent 

22600 Hall Road, Ste. 205 

Clinton Twp., MI 48036 

(586) 263-5050 

ttomlinson@yorkdolanlaw.com 

Dated: July 29, 2025 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned certifies that the foregoing instrument was 

served upen all parties 

to ths abovs caussto each of the attornoys 

of record herein at 

theif 

reypecive 

addresses disclosed cn 

tis 

pleadings on 

uly 

¢ 

Az) 

20 

By: = Overnight 

i Pk 

X( E maited 

c 

[Zi E fled 

Sica

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATEWIDE MACOMB LLC, 

Petitioner, 

Vs. 

MTT Docket No. 25-001815 

MACOMB TOWNSHIP, 

Respondent. 

AARON M. FALES (P72864) 

TIMOTHY D. TOMLINSON (P48519) 

LAW OFFICE OF AARON M. FALES P.C. 

YORK, DOLAN & TOMLINSON, P.C. 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

Attorneys for Respondent 

330 Hamilton Row, Ste. 350 

22600 Hall Road, Ste. 205 

Birmingham, MI 48009 

Clinton Twp., MI 48036 

(248) 767-9840 

(586) 263-5050 

afaleslaw@gmail.com 

ttomlinson@yorkdolanlaw.com 

RESPONDENT'S AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

NOW COMES Respondent, Macomb Township, by and through its attorneys, York, 

Dolan & Tomlinson, P.C., and for its Affirmative Defenses, states as follows: 

L. 

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, the application of wrong principles or illegality on the part of 

the Respondent. 

3. 

Petitioner fails to allege that the mode and method of appraising its property 

failed to conform to the mode and method applied in the case of all of the 

properties in the Respondent’s taxing unit for the year in question.

Page 4

10. 

Petitioner fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to establish the true cash 

value, assessed value and taxable value of its property. 

Petitioner fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to support its allegation that 

the assessed value of its property, as equalized, is at a factor other than 50% and 

also fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to support is allegations that that 

the property’s taxable value is improper. 

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. 

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. 

Petitioner, in essence, seeks by Petition to challenge the process of county and 

state equalization as to the which it has no legal standing and cannot maintain a 

cause of action. 

Any decrease in the value of Petitioner’s property was a result of its own 

intentional acts and/or negligence and cannot be allowed to reduce Petitioner’s 

otherwise equitable tax burden. 

Respondent has properly and lawfully assessed Petitioner’s property and 

established its taxable value in accordance with statutory and constitutional 

requirements.

Page 5

11. 

Respondent reserves the right to add to these Affirmative Defenses any new 

Affirmative Defenses that discovery reveals. 

WHEREFORE, Respondent respectfully requests that this Honorable Tribunal dismiss 

the Petition, affirm the values as determined by Respondent, and award costs and attorney fees 

wrongfully incurred in having to defend this matter. 

Respectfully submitted, 

YORK, DOL: 

TOMLINSON, P.C. 

TIMOTHY D. TOMLINSON (P48519) 

Attorneys for Respondent 

+ 22600 Hall Rd., Ste. 205 

Clinton Township, MI 48036 

(586) 263-5050 

ttomlinson@yorkdolanlaw.com 

Dated: July 29, 2025 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned certifies that the foregoing instrument was 

served upon all partie 

0 above cause to each of the attorneys 

rd herein 

a 

i 

disclosed 25 

rs

PDF reading copy

← View full record