25-003350 Default Hearing Order (post-extension no response).pdf

Luke C Schock, Petitioner V City Of Detroit, Respondent · 25-003350-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 

Luke C Schock, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003350 

 

City of Detroit, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER FOR DEFAULT HEARING 

 

ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL 

 

The Tribunal has considered the file in this case and finds that Respondent was placed 

in default on October 22, 2025, because Respondent failed to file an answer. The 

Tribunal extended the time for Respondent to cure the default by an additional 14 days 

on November 21, 2025, and it has failed to respond or submit the required filing(s). 

Given this failure, the Tribunal finds that Respondent’s violation was willful. It also 

establishes a history of deliberate delay and refusing to comply with Tribunal rules and 

orders, both of which have prejudiced Petitioner. As a result, giving careful 

consideration to the Grimm factors and considering all options in determining what 

sanction is just and proper, the Tribunal finds that scheduling a default hearing is 

warranted, and a lesser sanction would not be appropriate or better serve the interests 

of justice.1 

 

Additionally, the Tribunal finds that Petitioner’s appeal includes an appeal of the 

classification of the subject property. The Tribunal has no jurisdiction over Petitioner’s 

classification claim because Petitioner was required to “notify the assessor and [] 

protest the assigned classification to the March board of review.” Additionally, “[a]n 

owner . . . may appeal the decision of the March board of review by filing a petition with 

the state tax commission not later than June 30 in that tax year.” As such, the Tribunal 

is not the proper venue for a classification claim brought forward by a property owner. 

Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that a default hearing shall be scheduled in the normal course.2 

 

1 See Grimm v Dep’t of Treasury, 291 Mich App 140 (2010). Though Grimm was specific to the sanction 

of dismissal, the cases cited by the Court, and the reasoning behind its adoption of the factors set forth 

therein are not so narrow. The factors apply equally to default judgements, or in the case of the Tribunal 

proceedings, the conducting of a default hearing. See Bass v Combs, 238 Mich App 16 (1999), overruled 

in part on other grounds by Dimmitt & Owens Fin, Inc v Deloitte & Touche (ISC), LLC, 481 Mich 618 

(2008), Vicencio v Ramirez, 211 Mich App 501 (1995), and Traxler v Ford Motor Co, 227 Mich App 276 

(1998). See also TTR 237. 

2 A “default hearing" is “a hearing at which the defaulted party is precluded from presenting any testimony, 

offering any evidence, and examining the other party's witnesses.” TTR 203(e).

MTT Docket No. 25-003350 

Page 2 of 2 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s classification appeal only is DISMISSED. 

 

 

 

Entered: December 16, 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

← View full record