25-003653 P Ex Def R def SC no ans.pdf
Thomas Hutchinson, Mary Hutchinson, Petitioners V Township Of Lake, Respondent · 25-003653-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 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 Thomas Hutchinson and Mary Hutchinson, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL Petitioners, SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION v MTT Docket No. 25-003653 Lake Township, Presiding Judge Respondent. Patricia L. Halm ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR PETITIONERS TO CURE DEFAULT ORDER HOLDING RESPONDENT IN DEFAULT ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL The Tribunal has considered the file in this case and finds that it entered an order holding Petitioners in default on October 23, 2025, because they failed to file a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal, i.e., notice related to the uncapping of the subject property.1 Petitioners were required to cure the default by obtaining a copy of the notice related to the uncapping of the subject property from Respondent and submit a copy to the Tribunal within 14 days. Petitioners have had ample time to comply, yet have failed to respond or submit the required filings. Though the Tribunal finds an extension of time to cure the default appropriate, Petitioners’ failure to comply with Tribunal orders and its Rules of Practice and Procedure has established a history of deliberate delay that would justify the dismissal of the case for failure to timely comply with this order.2 Additionally, the Tribunal finds that Respondent has failed to file an answer. See TTR 281. Respondent must file an answer within 14 days of the entry of this order. Tribunal rules and Small Claims answer forms can be found on our website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib. Furthermore, the Tribunal finds that Petitioners’ appeal includes an appeal of the classification of the subject property. The Tribunal has no jurisdiction over Petitioners’ classification claim because Petitioners were 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.”3 As such, the Tribunal is not the proper venue for a classification claim brought forward by a property owner. Therefore, 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 MCL 211.34c(6). (Emphasis added.)
Page 2
MTT Docket No. 25-003653 Page 2 of 2 IT IS ORDERED that the time for Petitioners to cure the default is EXTENDED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioners must complete the following to cure the default: (1) file a copy of the notice related to the uncapping of the subject property issued by Respondent, (2) file a Motion to Set Aside Default, (3) pay the $25.00 fee required for the filing of the motion, and (4) 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 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent is held in DEFAULT. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent must do the following to cure the default: file an answer. The foregoing must be filed with the Tribunal within 14 days of the entry of this order. Failure to comply with this order may result in dismissal of the case, as provided by TTR 237, or Respondent being required to file a Motion to Set Aside Default with the applicable filing fee, as provided by TTR 231.5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioners’ classification appeal only is DISMISSED. Entered: January 22, 2026 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). 5 See also MCL 205.732.