Answer Carlton Acquision.pdf
Carlton Acquisition LLC Petitioner Vs. City Of Detroit Respondent · 26-000749-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
1 STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL CARLTON ACQUISITION, LLC Petitioner, v CITY OF DETROIT, Docket No. 26-000749 Respondent Parcel No. 05003477-8 ____________________________________________________________________________/ ANSWER TO AMENDED PETITION and AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Now Comes Respondent, City of Detroit, by and through it undersigned counsel and in Answer to the Amended Petition filed in this matter states the following: The Parties 1. Respondent, City of Detroit, neither admits nor denies and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 2. Respondent admits as true. The Subject Property 3. Respondent admits as true. 4. Respondent admits as true. 5. Respondent admits as true. The 2026 Assessment 6. Respondent admits as true. 7. Respondent admits as true.
Page 2
2 8. Respondent neither admits nor denies and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 9. Respondent admits as true. 10. Respondent admits that this appeal contains issues of valuation for assessment purposes of the subject property, although Petitioner does not believe that this appeal involves issues of “additions” or “losses, but reserves the right to assert said issues. Respondent reserves the right to property respond, should Petitioner raise said issues. 11. Respondent denies that the 2026 assessment is violative of the Michigan Constitution, the GPTA and other Michigan law. Respondent also denies the other allegations contained in the corresponding paragraph. 12. Petitioner denies the allegations in the corresponding paragraph. CONCLUSION and REQUEST FOR RELIEF Wherefore, Respondent respectfully requests that this Honorable Tribunal dismiss the Petition in this matter and award attorney fees and costs to Respondent. Dated: July 7, 2026 /s/Mary Beth Cobbs By: Mary Beth Cobbs ( P40080) Kevin C. Richard ( P 43417) Attorneys for Respondent City of Detroit Law Department 2 Woodward Ave., Ste. 500 Detroit, MI 48226
Page 3
3 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES NOW COMES Respondent, City of Detroit, and asserts the following Affirmative Defenses to the Petitioner’s claims: 1. Petitioner’s lacks standing and/or capacity to bring forth this Petition. 2. Petitioner’s claims may be barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 3. This Tribunal lacks subject matter jurisdiction. 4. Petitioner has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Wherefore, Respondent respectfully requests that this Honorable Tribunal dismiss the Petition in this matter and award attorney fees and costs to Respondent. Dated: July 7, 2026 /s/Mary Beth Cobbs By: Mary Beth Cobbs ( P40080) Kevin C. Richard ( P 43417) Attorneys for Respondent City of Detroit Law Department 2 Woodward Ave., Ste. 500 Detroit, MI 48226 313.237.3075 cobbm@detroitmi.gov
Page 4
4 PROOF OF SERVICE On July 7, 2026, I mailed by first class mail a copy of Respondent’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to: Brian E. Etzel, Esq. WILLIAMS, WILLIAMS, RATTNER & PLUNKETT, PC 380 N. Old Woodward Ave, Ste. 300 Birmingham, MI 48009 I declare that the above statement is true to the best of my information, knowledge, and belief. Dated: July 7,2026 /s/Mary Beth Cobbs Mary Beth Cobbs ( P40080) City of Detroit Law Department 2 Woodward Ave., Ste. 500 Detroit, MI 48226