Answer 26-001039-TT.pdf
Siddhesh LLC Petitioner Vs. Township Of Texas Respondent · 26-001039-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 AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL SIDDHESH LLC, Petitioner, MTT Docket No. 26-001039-TT V TEXAS CHARTER TOWNSHIP, Respondent. Michelle M. Silvey (P69494) Robert E. Thall (P46421) Alex Morse / Cameron Beckner Bauckham, Thall, Seeber, DuCharme, McMillen &Associates, Inc. Kaufman & Koches, P.C. Representatives for Petitioner Attorney for Respondent 9229 Delegates Row, Ste. 375 470 W. Centre Ave., Suite A Indianapolis, IN 46240 Portage, MI 49024-5362 (317) 689-6467 ofc 269-382-4500 (917) 488-7825 mobile thall@michigantownshiplaw.com msilvey@dmainc.com amorese@dmainc.com cbeckner@dmainc.com ANSWER TO PETITION WITH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Respondent, Texas Charter Township, states the following in response to the respective paragraphs of the Petition filed in this matter: 1. In answer to paragraph 1 of the Petition, Respondent admits the allegation therein. 2. In answer to paragraph 2 of the Petition, Respondent admits the allegation therein. 3. In answer to paragraph 3 of the Petition, Respondent admits the allegation therein. 4. In answer to paragraph 4 of the Petition, Respondent admits the allegations therein. 5. In answer to paragraph 5 of the Petition, Respondent admits the allegations therein. 6. In answer to paragraph 6 of the Petition, Respondent admits the allegations therein.
Page 2
7. In answer to paragraph 7 of the Petition, Respondent admits the allegation therein. 8. In answer to paragraph 8 of the Petition, Respondent admits the allegation therein. 9. In answer to paragraph 9 of the Petition, Respondent admits the allegation therein. 10. In answer to paragraph 10 of the Petition, Respondent admits the allegations therein. 11. In answer to paragraph 11 of the Petition, Respondent admits that the Petitioner has raised the issues identified therein. 12. In answer to paragraph 12 of the Petition, Respondent admits the allegation therein. 13. In answer to paragraph 13 of the Petition, Respondent admits the allegations therein. 14. In answer to paragraph 14 of the Petition, Respondent denies the allegations therein as untrue. 15. In answer to paragraph 15 of the Petition, Respondent admits the allegations therein. 16. In answer to paragraph 16 of the Petition including its subparts, Respondent denies the allegations therein as untrue. WHEREFORE, Respondent respectfully request that the Tribunal enter an Order denying the relief requested by Petitioner and uphold and affirm the valuation as established by the Respondent and require Petitioner to pay Respondent’s costs and attorney fees. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Please take notice that Respondent may rely on one or more of the following affirmative defenses: 1. Petitioner has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
Page 3
2. The Tribunal lacks jurisdiction over Petitioner and/or the subject property. 3. The service of process was insufficient. 4. The subject property is under assessed and/or the taxable value and/or state equalized value of the subject property is too low, and should therefore be appropriately increased to comply with the mandate of the applicable provisions of law. 5. Respondent reserves the right to file such additional affirmative defenses as may become apparent pursuant to discovery procedures during the pendency of this matter. WHEREFORE Respondent requests that the Tribunal enter a determination of no cause in its favor, and such other and further relief as is appropriate including costs and attorney fees. Respectfully submitted, BAUCKHAM, THALL, SEEBER, KAUFMAN & KOCHES, P.C. Date: September 17, 2026 By: /s/ Robert E. Thall Robert E. Thall Attorney for Respondent