26-000256 Dismiss (untimely-poverty).pdf

Limuel Hubbard, Petitioner V City Of Detroit, Respondent · 26-000256-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.

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 

Limuel Hubbard, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 26-000256 

 

City of Detroit, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

 

The Tribunal has considered the file in this case and finds that it has no authority over 

Petitioner’s appeal because it was not filed within 30 days of the issuance of the 

December Board of Review (BOR) Decision, as required by MCL 211.53c. On March 

10, 2026, the Tribunal issued an order holding Petitioner in default for failing to submit a 

copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal, i.e., December BOR Decision.1 Although 

Petitioner failed to respond, the petition indicates that Petitioner is appealing the denial 

of a poverty exemption under MCL 211.7u, which was issued by the December BOR on 

December 9, 2025. Petitioner did not file this appeal until January 22, 2026, and 

inasmuch as the Tribunal has no equitable power to waive or otherwise disregard a 

statutory filing deadline, it has no authority to grant Petitioner the relief requested.2 

Petitioner’s appeal is barred by the statute of limitations. 

 

The Tribunal notes that the petition contends that sufficient notice was not sent to 

Petitioner because the notice was not delivered to Petitioner until January 7, 2026. This 

contention of improper notice, if actionable, would require a determination by an 

applicable authority that the purported error resulted in a due process violation. As 

explained above, the Tribunal lacks any equitable authority to consider a potential due-

process violation. Jurisdiction as a result of a failure of a unit of government to comply 

with a statutory obligation, if there was any, may be vested upon the Tribunal by a 

judicial body only as a matter of equity. Lacking jurisdiction, the only appropriate action 

is dismissal. 

 

Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that the case is DISMISSED. 

 

 

1 Petitioner would be subject to extended default if this case were to continue for failing to respond to the 

default. Should Petitioner choose to appeal this decision, Petitioner may file a copy of the December 

BOR Decision, showing the petition was timely filed, along with a Motion for Reconsideration. 

2 See Sixarp, LLC v Byron Twp, __Mich__ (2025). See also Federal-Mogul Corp v Dep’t of Treasury, 161 

Mich App 346 (1987), Elec Data Sys Corp v Flint Twp, 253 Mich App 538 (2002), and VanderWerp v 

Plainfield Twp, 278 Mich App 624 (2008), noting that the Tribunal’s powers are limited to those authorized 

by statute and do not include powers of equity.

MTT Docket No. 26-000256 

Page 2 of 2 

 

This order resolves all pending claims in this matter and closes this case. 

 

APPEAL RIGHTS 

If you disagree with the final decision in this case, you may file a motion for 

reconsideration with the Tribunal or a claim of appeal with the Michigan Court of 

Appeals. 

 

A motion for reconsideration must be filed with the Tribunal with the required filing fee 

within 21 days from the date of entry of the final decision. Because the final decision 

closes the case, the motion cannot be filed through the Tribunal’s web-based e-filing 

system; it must be filed by mail or personal service. The fee for the filing of such 

motions is $50.00 in the Entire Tribunal and $25.00 in the Small Claims Division, unless 

the Small Claims decision relates to the valuation of property and the property had a 

principal residence exemption of at least 50% at the time the petition was filed or the 

decision relates to the grant or denial of a poverty or disabled veterans exemption and, 

if so, there is no filing fee. You are required to serve a copy of the motion on the 

opposing party by mail or personal service or by email if the opposing party agrees to 

electronic service, and proof demonstrating that service must be submitted with the 

motion. Responses to motions for reconsideration are prohibited and there are no oral 

arguments unless otherwise ordered by the Tribunal. 

 

Alternatively, you may file a claim of appeal with the Michigan Court of Appeals. If the 

claim is filed within 21 days of the entry of the final decision, it is an “appeal of right.” If 

the claim is filed more than 21 days after the entry of the final decision, it is an “appeal 

by leave.” A copy of the claim of appeal must be filed with the Tribunal to certify the 

record on appeal. There is no certification fee. 

 

 

Entered: April 13, 2026 

 

 

 

 

 

By: /s/ Patricia L. Halm 

kac/jc 

 

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

← View full record