Petition - POS.pdf
Woodington Properties LLC Petitioner Vs. City Of Detroit Respondent · 26-000706-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 DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL Woodingham Properties LLC, Petitioner, v City of Detroit, Respondent. MTT Docket No. 26-000706 _____________________________________________________________________________/ PROOF OF SERVICE (Property Tax Petition) On the date below I sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, a copy of the Petition to: City Assessor City of Detroit 2 Woodward Avenue, Suite 804 Detroit, MI 48226 City Clerk City of Detroit 2 Woodward Avenue, Suite 200 Detroit, MI 48226 On the date below I sent by first class mail a copy of the Petition to: Equalization Director Wayne County 500 Griswold, 21st Floor Detroit, MI 48226 County Clerk Wayne County 2 Woodward Avenue, Room 201 Detroit, MI 48226 Secretary, Board of Education Detroit Public Schools Fisher Building, 12th Floor 3011 W. Grand Boulevard Detroit, MI 48202 State Treasurer Department of Treasury 430 W. Allegan Street Lansing, MI 48922 I declare that the statements above are true to the best of my information, knowledge and belief. /s/ Laura M. Hallahan Dated: July 14, 2026
Page 2
1 STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS WOODINGHAM PROPERTIES LLC, Petitioner, v CITY OF DETROIT, Respondent. MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL Docket No. 26-000706______ Parcel No.: 16009357-8, and additional parcels _____________________________________________________________________________/ PROPERTY TAX PETITION (Entire Tribunal, 2026 Tax Year) Petitioner, by and through its attorneys, Hallahan & Associates, P.C., contends: 1. The property that is the subject of this appeal consists of these contiguous real property parcels: REAL PROPERTY - CONTIGUOUS Parcel Number Address Classification Use 16009357-8 7765 W. Eight Mile Comml-Imp Car Dealership 16028606-15 20514 Woodingham 301-Indl-Imp Car Dealership 2. ☒ N/A. If the assessment at issue was protested, the protest was made to Respondent’s: ☐March, ☐ July, ☐ December Board of Review. 3. Respondent, identified above, assesses and collects taxes on the subject property. 4. The subject property is located in the County of Wayne and school district of Detroit Public Schools. 5. Petitioner is a taxpayer/party-in-interest with respect to property taxes on the subject property. 6. The Petitioner’s principal office/legal residence address is: 2894 Greenlaw Avenue, Commerce Township, MI 48382.
Page 3
2 7. This appeal involves issues related to: ☒ the subject property’s true cash and taxable values ☐ the subject property’s taxable value only there is a dispute as to the value of an addition or loss: ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ uniformity of the subject property’s assessment ☐ the subject property’s exemption from ad valorem taxation under MCL ______ 8. The tax year at issue is 2026. 9. The subject property is listed on the attachment, including, by parcel number: a. Respondent’s Board of Review established values, b. Petitioner’s value contentions, and c. Values in dispute. 10. Petitioner relies upon the following to support the relief requested: The 2026 values imposed on Petitioner’s property, and the taxes to be levied and collected thereon, are invalid and unlawful and operate as fraud upon the taxpayer for the reasons that: a. The assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values exceed the amounts permitted by the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes; b. The assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values are at higher percentages of true cash value than permissible under the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes; c. The assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values are based upon an erroneous determination of the true cash value of that portion of Petitioner’s property that is taxable under Michigan law and are based upon the application of wrong principles; and d. The assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values, and the mode of assessment adopted by Respondent, discriminate against Petitioner and deny Petitioner its constitutional rights of uniformity, equal protection and due process of law.
Page 4
3 Petitioner requests that the Tribunal enter an order reducing the 2026 values from those established by Respondent’s Board of Review to those contended by Petitioner, and order refunds attributable to the reductions, with interest, as provided by the Tax Tribunal Act. HALLAHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. /s/ Laura M. Hallahan Laura M. Hallahan (P42101) Attorney for Petitioner 1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202 Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302-0179 (248) 731-3089 Dated: April 23, 2026 lhallahan@hallahanlaw.com Filing Fee: $425
Page 5
4 ATTACHMENT TO PETITION (Subject Property) VALUES Respondent’s Board of Review -and- Petitioner’s Contention Parcel Number Respondent Petitioner TCV SEV TV TCV SEV TV 16009357-8 226,000 113,000 105,762 100,000 50,000 50,000 16028606-15 1,022,600 511,300 511,300 535,000 267,500 267,500 Totals 1,248,600 624,300 617,062 635,000 317,500 317,500 VALUES IN DISPUTE Parcel Number TCV SEV TV 16009357-8 126,000 63,000 55,762 16028606-15 487,600 243,800 243,800 Totals 613,600 306,800 299,562