24-003938 Extend Default.pdf
Prager, Petitioner V Township Of Geneva, Respondent · 24-003938-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 Prager, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL Petitioner, SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION v MTT Docket No. 24-003938 Geneva Township, Presiding Judge Respondent. Patricia L. Halm ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR PETITIONER TO CURE DEFAULT On November 7, 2024, Petitioner filed a letter in response to the Tribunal’s October 22, 2024 Order of Default. The Tribunal has considered the response and the case file and finds that Petitioner was held in default because insufficient filing fees were submitted with petitions filed on or around July 23, 2024.1 Petitioner sought by letter to explain that the Tribunal advised Petitioner’s authorized representative by phone of the need to pay only the contiguous parcel fee of $25.00. However, the Tribunal cannot rely on purported advice from a Tribunal representative over the Tribunal Rules. TTR 267(3)(a) states in part: “If the petition contains multiple, contiguous parcels of property owned by the same person, there is an additional $25.00 fee for each additional parcel . . ..” (Emphasis added.) Petitioner filed separate appeals rather than a single petition and contiguous parcel forms. More importantly, the lack of common ownership of the parcels in the petitions filed on July 23, 2024, disallows use of the contiguous parcel rule for a lower petition filing fee under TTR 267(3)(a). However, given Petitioner’s response to the default, the nature of Petitioner’s initial filing and letter, and the confusion, the Tribunal finds it is within its discretion to waive the requirement that Petitioner file a motion or pay a motion fee as a requirement to set aside the default in this case.2 Petitioner must still pay the separate petition filing fees. Although Petitioner responded to the Order of Default, their attempt to cure is incomplete because Petitioner failed to pay the petition filing fee. Though the Tribunal finds an extension of time to cure the default appropriate, Petitioner’s failure to comply with Tribunal orders and its Rules of Practice and Procedure has established a history of deliberate delay that would justify dismissal of the case for failure to timely comply with this Order.3 Therefore, 1 The Order further stated, “Failure to comply with this Order will result in the defaulted party being required to file a motion to set aside the default (with appropriate filing fee).” 2 TTR 231. 3 See Grimm v Dep’t of Treasury, 291 Mich App 140 (2010).
Page 2
MTT Docket No. 24-003938 Page 2 of 2 IT IS ORDERED that the time for Petitioner to cure the default is EXTENDED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner must complete the following to cure the default: pay the $125.00 petition filing fee. The foregoing must be filed with the Tribunal within 14 days of the entry of this Order.4 Failure to comply with this Order may result in the dismissal of the case, as provided by TTR 231.5 Entered: December 3, 2024 By _____________________________ bw 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 219(5). 5 See also MCL 205.732.