E G G Inc v Township of Saginaw (26-001568) Respondent's Answer to Entire Tribunal Property Tax Petition.pdf

E G G Inc Petitioner Vs. Township Of Saginaw Respondent · 26-001568-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 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

E G GINC, 

Petitioner, 

MTT Docket No.: 26-001568 

\4 

TOWNSHIP OF SAGINAW, 

Respondent. 

COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL 

BRAUN KENDRICK FINKBEINER P.L.C. 

By: 

Joshua T. Shillair, Esq. (P72674) 

By: 

Francis J. Keating (P39223) 

Vice President / Tax Appeal 

Attorneys for Respondent 

Representative for Petitioner 

4301 Fashion Square Blvd. 

400 W. 4 Street, Suite 350 

Saginaw, MI 48603 

Royal Oak, MI 48067 

(989) 498-2100 

(248) 226-1632 office 

frakea@braunkendrick.com 

(248) 226-1633 fax 

Joshua.Shillair@Colliers.com 

Karen.Cameron@Colliers.com 

RESPONDENT’S ANSWER TO ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION 

NOW COMES Respondent, Township of Saginaw, by and through its attorneys, Braun 

Kendrick Finkbeiner P.L.C., and for its Answer to Petition, states as follows: 

1. 

Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations in paragraph 1. 

2. 

Admitted. 

3. 

Admitted. 

4. 

Respondent admits that the subject property is classified Commercial Improved, 

and 

is presently used for commercial purposes. Respondent lacks knowledge or information 

sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in paragraph 4. 

4907-6689-5051, v. 1

5. 

Respondent admits no protest to the Board of Review was required for the subject 

property. 

6. 

Admitted. 

7. 

Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations in paragraph 7. 

8. 

Admitted. 

9. 

Admitted. 

10. 

Respondent denies as untrue the allegations in paragraph 10. 

Respondent denies as untrue the allegations in paragraph 10(a). 

Respondent denies as untrue the allegations in paragraph 10(b). 

Respondent denies as untrue the allegations in paragraph 10(c). 

Respondent denies as untrue the allegations in paragraph 10(d). 

11. 

Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations in paragraph 11. 

12. 

Respondent admits that Petitioner has correctly computed the amount of assessed 

value in contention by subtracting its erroneous value claim from the value correctly determined 

by Respondent. 

13. 

Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations in paragraph 13. 

4907-6689-5051, v. 1

NEW MATTERS AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

1% 

Petitioner has failed to allege specific and sufficient facts to set forth a cause of 

action against Respondent. 

2: 

Petitioner has failed to allege specific and sufficient facts to establish fraud, error 

of law, discrimination, application of the wrong principles, 

or illegality on the part of the 

Respondent. 

3. 

Petitioner has failed to show that any factor other than fifty percent (50%) was 

applied to the true cash value of Petitioner’s property, as well as all others, to arrive 

at the 

respective assessment appearing on the roll, and also fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to 

support its allegations that the property’s taxable value is improper. 

4. 

Respondent 

has 

properly 

and 

lawfully 

assessed 

Petitioner's 

property 

and 

established its taxable value in accordance with statutory and constitutional requirements. 

5 

Petitioner has the burden of establishing the subject property’s true cash value. 

MCL 205.737(3). 

6. 

Respondent reserves the right to assert additional affirmative defenses during the 

pendency of this action. 

WHEREFORE, 

Respondent, 

Township 

of Saginaw, 

respectfully 

requests 

that 

this 

Honorable Tribunal provide it with the following relief: 

A. 

Dismiss the Petition with prejudice, and award Respondent its costs and attorney 

fees wrongfully incurred in the defense of this action; and 

B. 

Provide Respondent with such other relief as the Tribunal deems appr 

BRAUN KENDRIC 

EINER P.L.C. 

Dated: 

September 17, 2026 

BY: 

Attorney for Rgspondent 

FRANCIS J. Joma (P39223) 

4907-6689-5051, 

v. 1

← View full record