SA default reply 24-004053.pdf
Daniel Zuckerbrod, Petitioner Vs. City Of Southfield, Respondent · 24-004053-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 DANIEL & DAPHNA ZUCKERBROD, Petitioner, v CITY OF SOUTHFIELD, Respondent. MTT Docket No. 24-004053 _____________________________________________________________________________/ THOMAS P. CHRISTY (P55593) DEAN & FULKERSON, P.C. Attorney for Petitioner 100 W. Big Beaver, Suite 650 Troy, MI 48084 (248) 362-1300 LAURA M. HALLAHAN (P42101) SETH A. O’LOUGHLIN (P80257) KELSEA M. MELCHER (P85821) HALLAHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. Attorneys for Respondent 1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202 Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302 (248) 731-3089 _____________________________________________________________________________/ RESPONDENT’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PETITIONER’S MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT Respondent, City of Southfield, by and through its attorneys, Hallahan & Associates, P.C., states the following in opposition to Petitioner’s Motion to Set Aside Default: 1. On April 4, 2025 Petitioner was held in default for failing to file a proof of service relative to the Severed Petition filed in this case and allowed 14 days to cure the defect. Since then: • Petitioner filed a defective Proof of Service on February 18, 2025; • On May 27, 2025 the default was vacated, the vacating order set aside as incorrect, and the default extended by another 14 days. Petitioner was also informed that it would need to file a “Motion to Set Aside Default [and] pay the $50.00 fee required for the filing of the motion.”
Page 2
• On June 5, 2025 Petitioner filed a Proof of Service but no Motion or Motion filing fee; • On June 23, 2025 the Default was extended for another 14 days and Petitioner was again reminded of the requirements to set aside default; 2. In short, Petitioner was provided a total of 36 days to cure the issue giving rise to the default over a total time period of 41 days due to the date the Orders were issued. Despite that, Petitioner didn’t actually timely file its Motion as the final time period expired on July 7, 2025.1 3. Petitioner has had multiple opportunities to cure the default, was repeatedly warned that failure to do so would result in a dismissal, and has apparently failed to either correctly read the multiple orders or has purposefully chosen to defy the Tribunal. As warned by the Tribunal, the only appropriate remedy is dismissal as Petitioner’s actions have needlessly delayed this 2024 appeal such that we are in the latter half of 2025 and not yet close to even having the case put on a prehearing general call for a 2024 tax year appeal. There is no good cause to set aside the default and there exists good cause to dismiss the case. That Petitioner did not even attempt to address its failure to timely file the Motion is proof of this. WHEREFORE, Respondent respectfully asks the Tribunal to deny Petitioner’s Motion for Default and Dismiss the Appeal for Petitioner’s repeated noncompliance with Tribunal rules. HALLAHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 1 While dated July 7 the motion is docketed as if filed July 8, 2025.
Page 3
/s/ Seth A. O’Loughlin________________ LAURA M. HALLAHAN (P42101) SETH A. O’LOUGHLIN (P80257) KELSEA M. MELCHER (P85821) Attorneys for Respondent 1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202 Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302 Dated: July 25, 2025 (248) 731-3089 PROOF OF MAILING On the date below I sent by electronic mail a copy of the foregoing Motion to Set Aside Default to: Thomas D. Christy Dean & Fulkerson, P.C. tchristy@dflaw.com I declare that the statement above is true to the best of my information, knowledge and belief. /s/ Seth A. O’Loughlin_________________ Dated: July 25, 2025 Seth A. O’Loughlin