Full record / 25-002982 Extend Default PD.pdf

25-002982 Extend Default PD.pdf

Carol J Biggs, Petitioner V City Of Detroit, Respondent · 25-002982-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

 

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 

Carol J Biggs, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002982 

 

City of Detroit, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR PETITIONER TO CURE DEFAULT 

 

ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL 

 

The Tribunal has considered the file in this case and finds that it entered an order 

holding Petitioner in default on September 11, 2025, because Petitioner failed to file a 

copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal, i.e. March Board of Review (BOR) results.1 

Petitioner was required to cure the default within 14 days. Petitioner has had ample 

time to comply, yet has failed to respond or submit the required filings. 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.2 

 

Additionally, the Tribunal finds that Petitioner is appealing assessments for the 2023 

and 2024 tax years, and the Tribunal has no authority over those assessments under 

MCL 205.735a, as the petition was not timely filed.3 Further, the Tribunal also has no 

authority over those assessments, as the facts alleged do not establish that the 

assessments were the result of a clerical error (i.e., “an error of a transpositional, 

typographical, or mathematical nature”) or a mutual mistake of fact (i.e., “an erroneous 

belief, which is shared and relied on by both parties”). Rather, the facts alleged indicate 

a valuation dispute that does not involve the correction of a clerical error or mutual 

mistake of fact. 

 

Therefore, 

 

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: (1) file a copy of the March BOR results, (2) file a Motion to Set Aside Default, 

 

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 See Grimm v Dep’t of Treasury, 291 Mich App 140 (2010). 

3 A list of Tribunal rules are available online at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-002982 

Page 2 of 2 

 

and (3) file proof the motion was served on Respondent. 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 237. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s assessment appeal is PARTIALLY 

DISMISSED. The appeal shall continue for the 2025 Tax Year only. 

 

 

Entered: October 9, 2025 

 

 

By _____________________________ 

kac 

 

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).

PDF reading copy

← View full record