Living Room LLC MTT# 25-002870 answer.pdf
Living Room LLC, Petitioner Vs. City Of Detroit, Respondent · 25-002870-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
1 STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL LIVING ROOM, LLC, Petitioner, v. Docket No. 25-002870 CITY OF DETROIT, Respondent. / ANSWER RESPONDENT, CITY OF DETROIT, for its Answer to the Petition filed in this matter states as follows: 1. Respondent admits. 2. Respondent admits. 3. Respondent admits. 4. Respondent admits. 5. No response is necessary. 6. Respondent admits. 7. No response is necessary. 8. Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations, there being an insufficient basis currently upon which to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations. However, as the subject property is classified as commercial no protest was necessary to the March Board of Review (MBOR). Additionally, as the subject property is classified as commercial the filing deadline for appeals such as this is May 31st and not July 31st.
Page 2
2 9. This matter was filed on or about July 25, 2025. The filing deadline for commercial appeals was May 31, 2025. Therefore, this matter was not timely filed and this Honorable Tribunal does not have jurisdiction. 10. Respondent admits. 11. Respondent denies as untrue. By way of explanation the City of Detroit Board of Assessors is not a local governmental unit. 12. Respondent admits. 13. Respondent admits only that Petitioner’s instant Tax Tribunal appeal alleges issues involving the subject property’s true cash and taxable values, however, Respondent denies that any such allegations have merit. 14. Respondent admits. 15. No response is necessary. 16. Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations, there being an insufficient basis currently upon which to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations. 17. Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations, there being an insufficient basis currently upon which to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations. 18. Based solely upon Petitioner’s unsubstantiated value contentions Respondent admits. 19. Pryer for Relief, no response is necessary. 20. Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations, there being an insufficient basis currently upon which to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations.
Page 3
3 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Respondent further asserts that Petitioner’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, by: 1. Petitioner’s claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 2. Petitioner has failed to state a claim for which relief may be granted. 3. Petitioner lacks standing. 4. This Tribunal lacks jurisdiction. WHEREFORE, Respondent City of Detroit respectfully requests that this Honorable Tribunal dismiss the petition in this matter and award costs and attorney fees. Respectfully Submitted, ______________________ Kevin C. Richard (P43417) City of Detroit Law Department Coleman A. Young Municipal Center 2 Woodward Avenue, Suite 500 Detroit, Michigan 48226 (313) 237-3061 Dated: October 22, 2025