24-004214 Kauffman v Assyria Twp.pdf
John P Kauffman, Petitioner V Township Of Assyria, Respondent · 24-004214-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 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 John P Kauffman, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL Petitioner, SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION v MTT Docket No. 24-004214 Assyria Township, Presiding Judge Respondent. Patricia L. Halm ORDER FOR DEFAULT HEARING ORDER PLACING PETITIONER IN DEFAULT The Tribunal has considered the file in this case and finds that Respondent was placed in default on February 13, 2025, because Respondent failed to file an answer to the petition. The Tribunal extended the time for Respondent to cure the default by an additional 14 days on April 25, 2025, and it has failed to respond or submit the required filings. Given this failure, the Tribunal finds that Respondent’s violation was willful. It also establishes a history of deliberate delay and refusing to comply with Tribunal rules and orders, both of which have prejudiced Petitioner. As a result, after giving careful consideration to the Grimm factors and considering all options in determining what sanction is just and proper, the Tribunal finds that scheduling a default hearing is warranted, and a lesser sanction would not be appropriate or better serve the interests of justice.1 Additionally, the Tribunal finds that within the same April 25, 2025 order, Petitioner was ordered to submit information or documentation showing that Petitioner provided the assessor with a copy of the recorded qualified forest school tax affidavit by December 31 of the tax years at issue.2 Petitioner was required to submit the required information within 14 days. Despite having ample time to comply, Petitioner failed to respond or submit the required filings. As a result, Petitioner is subject to default, as provided by TTR 237. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that a default hearing shall be scheduled in the normal course.3 1 See Grimm v Dep’t of Treasury, 291 Mich App 140 (2010). Though Grimm was specific to the sanction of dismissal, the cases cited by the Court, and the reasoning behind its adoption of the factors set forth therein are not so narrow. The factors apply equally to default judgements, or in the case of the Tribunal proceedings, the conducting of a default hearing. See Bass v Combs, 238 Mich App 16 (1999), overruled in part on other grounds by Dimmitt & Owens Fin, Inc v Deloitte & Touche (ISC), LLC, 481 Mich 618 (2008), Vicencio v Ramirez, 211 Mich App 501 (1995), and Traxler v Ford Motor Co, 227 Mich App 276 (1998). See also TTR 237. 2 See MCL 211.7jj[1]. 3 A “default hearing" is “a hearing at which the defaulted party is precluded from presenting any testimony, offering any evidence, and examining the other party's witnesses.” TTR 203(e).
Page 2
MTT Docket No. 24-004214 Page 2 of 2 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is HELD IN DEFAULT. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petitioner shall submit information and documentation indicating whether it possessed a recorded qualified forest school tax affidavit and whether it submitted a copy of that affidavit to the assessor by December 31 of the tax years at issue. Petitioner shall also file a proof of service evidencing service of the documentation on Respondent. Petitioner shall submit the foregoing within 14 days of entry of this order.4 Failure to comply with this order will result in the Petitioner being required to file a motion to set aside the default (with appropriate filing fee). Entered: June 2, 2025 By _____________________________ smm/gc 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 4 “A submission by mail is considered filed on the date indicated by the United States Postal Service postmark on the envelope containing the submission. A submission without a postmark or with an illegible postmark is considered filed on the date the submission is received by the tribunal. A submission by commercial delivery service is considered filed on the date the submission is given to the commercial service for delivery to the tribunal as indicated by the receipt date on the package containing the submission. A submission by personal service is considered filed on the date the submission is received. A submission through the tribunal’s e-filing system by 11:59 p.m. on a business day is considered filed on that business day. A submission by email to the email address designated by the tribunal by 11:59 p.m. on a business day is considered filed on that business day. A submission on a Saturday, a Sunday, or a holiday is considered filed on the following business day, as provided by section 35a of the tax tribunal act, MCL 205.735a.” TTR 225(5)