Full record / 25003032 Pontiac Answer - 360 N MLK LLC.pdf

25003032 Pontiac Answer - 360 N MLK LLC.pdf

360 N Mlk LLC, Petitioner Vs. City Of Pontiac, Respondent · 25-003032-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.

Page 1

CLARKHILL\18836\1009929\283432754.v1-9/17/25 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003032 

 

 

Parcel Nos. 64-14-21-482-002 

64-14-21-482-006 

64-14-28-229-001 

64-14-28-229-006 

64-14-28-229-007 

360 N MLK LLC, 

 

Petitioner, 

v 

 

CITY OF PONTIAC, 

 

Respondent. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/

 

Stephen Polter 

POLTER LAW 

Attorney for Petitioner 

2600 W Big Beaver, Suite L100 

Troy, MI 48084 

(248) 213-6800 

spolter@polterlaw.com 

 

Elizabeth White McDonnell (P62561) 

Sean P. Fitzgerald (P60654) 

CLARK HILL PLC 

Attorneys for Respondent 

200 Ottawa Avenue NW, Suite 500 

Grand Rapids, MI 49503 

(616) 608-1131 

ewhitemcdonnell@clarkhill.com 

sfitzgerald@clarkhill.com

 

/

 

RESPONDENT’S ANSWER TO PETITION 

Respondent, City of Pontiac, by and through its attorneys, Clark Hill PLC, hereby answers 

the Petition filed by Petitioner, 360 N MLK LLC, and states as follows: 

1. 

Respondent lacks the knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of 

the allegations contained in paragraph 1 of the Petition. 

2. 

Respondent admits the allegations in paragraph 2 of the Petition. 

3. 

Respondent lacks the knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of 

the allegations contained in paragraph 3 of the Petition.

Page 2

2 

CLARKHILL\18836\1009929\283432754.v1-9/17/25 

4. 

Respondent lacks the knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of 

the allegations contained in paragraph 4 of the Petition. 

5. 

Respondent lacks the knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of 

the allegations contained in paragraph 5 of the Petition. 

6. 

Respondent admits the allegations in paragraph 6 of the Petition. 

7. 

Respondent lacks the knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of 

the allegations contained in paragraph 7 of the Petition. 

8. 

Respondent lacks the knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of 

the allegations contained in paragraph 8 of the Petition. 

9. 

Respondent lacks the knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of 

the allegations contained in paragraph 9 of the Petition. 

10. 

Respondent denies the allegations in paragraph 10 of the Petition as untrue. 

11. 

Respondent admits the allegations in paragraph 11 of the Petition. 

12. 

Respondent lacks the knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of 

the allegations contained in paragraph 12 of the Petition. 

13. 

Respondent lacks the knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of 

the allegations contained in paragraph 13 of the Petition. 

14. 

Respondent lacks the knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of 

the allegations contained in paragraph 14 of the Petition. 

15. 

Respondent lacks the knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of 

the allegations contained in paragraph 15 of the Petition. 

16. 

Respondent admits the allegations in paragraph 16 of the Petition.

Page 3

3 

CLARKHILL\18836\1009929\283432754.v1-9/17/25 

17. 

Respondent lacks the knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of 

the allegations contained in paragraph 17 of the Petition. 

18. 

Respondent lacks the knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of 

the allegations contained in paragraph 18 of the Petition. 

19. 

Respondent denies the allegations in paragraph 19 of the Petition as untrue. 

20. 

Respondent denies the allegations in paragraph 20 of the Petition as untrue. 

WHEREFORE, Respondent respectfully requests that the Tribunal dismiss the Petition, 

sustain the assessed, taxable and true cash values with respect to the property as established by 

Respondent, award the costs and fees, including attorneys’ fees, incurred by Respondents in the 

defense of this matter, and grant such other and further relief as the Tribunal deems just and proper. 

 

 

 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PETITIONER’S PETITION 

NOW COMES Respondent, City of Pontiac, by and through its attorneys, Clark Hill PLC, 

and hereby offers the following Affirmative Defenses to Petitioner’s Petition as follows: 

1. 

Petitioner fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to set forth a cause of action 

against Respondent and to support its claim of relief. 

 

 

 

 

 

Dated: September 17, 2025 

Respectfully submitted, 

 

CLARK HILL PLC 

 

 

By: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Elizabeth White McDonnell (P62561) 

 

Sean P. Fitzgerald (P60654) 

Attorneys for Respondent

Page 4

4 

CLARKHILL\18836\1009929\283432754.v1-9/17/25 

2. 

Respondent has properly and lawfully classified Petitioner’s property and 

established its taxable and assessed value in accordance with local ordinances, state regulations, 

statutory and constitutional requirements. 

3. 

Petitioner may lack the proper authority of the property owner to submit the present 

appeal, and therefore lacks standing to challenge the subject assessments. 

4. 

Respondent relies upon any and all other affirmative defenses set forth in Michigan 

Court Rules 2.111 and 2.116 and the Rules of the Michigan Tax Tribunal to the extent such 

affirmative defenses are established to exist during discovery and the pendency of this matter, and 

Respondent reserves the right to amend these affirmative defenses upon completion of discovery. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dated: September 17, 2025 

Respectfully submitted, 

 

CLARK HILL PLC 

 

 

By: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Elizabeth White McDonnell (P62561) 

 

Sean P. Fitzgerald (P60654) 

Attorneys for Respondent

Page 5

CLARKHILL\18836\1009929\283432755.v1-9/17/25 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

________________________________________________ 

 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003032 

 

 

Parcel Nos. 64-14-21-482-002 

64-14-21-482-006 

64-14-28-229-001 

64-14-28-229-006 

64-14-28-229-007 

360 N MLK LLC, 

 

Petitioner, 

v 

 

CITY OF PONTIAC, 

 

Respondent. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/

 

Stephen Polter 

POLTER LAW 

Attorney for Petitioner 

2600 W Big Beaver, Suite L100 

Troy, MI 48084 

(248) 213-6800 

spolter@polterlaw.com 

 

Elizabeth White McDonnell (P62561) 

Sean P. Fitzgerald (P60654) 

CLARK HILL PLC 

Attorneys for Respondent 

200 Ottawa Avenue NW, Suite 500 

Grand Rapids, MI 49503 

(616) 608-1131 

ewhitemcdonnell@clarkhill.com 

sfitzgerald@clarkhill.com

 

/

 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

The undersigned certifies that on the date below, a copy of Respondent’s Answer was 

served via electronic mail, upon: 

Stephen Polter 

spolter@polterlaw.com 

 

 

 

Date: September 17, 2025 

 

 

 

/s/ Bailey Dettloff 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bailey Dettloff

PDF reading copy

← View full record