10 Middlebelt Property LLC, Petitioner Vs. City Of Farmington Hills, Respondent

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

10 Middlebelt Property LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v 

 MTT Docket No. 25-002527

City Of Farmington Hills,

Respondent.

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO WITHDRAW

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The Tribunal has reviewed the file in the above-captioned case and finds that the parties 

have filed a Joint Motion to Withdraw the appeal. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the parties’ Joint Motion to Withdraw is GRANTED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED. 

This order resolves all pending issues and closes the case.

By:_____________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: December 3, 2025

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

Page 2

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

10 Middlebelt Property LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v 

 MTT Docket No. 25-002527

City Of Farmington Hills,

Respondent.

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO WITHDRAW

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The Tribunal has reviewed the file in the above-captioned case and finds that the parties 

have filed a Joint Motion to Withdraw the appeal. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the parties’ Joint Motion to Withdraw is GRANTED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED. 

This order resolves all pending issues and closes the case.

By:_____________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: December 3, 2025

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

Page 3

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

10 Middlebelt Property LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v 

 MTT Docket No. 25-002527

City Of Farmington Hills,

Respondent.

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO WITHDRAW

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The Tribunal has reviewed the file in the above-captioned case and finds that the parties 

have filed a Joint Motion to Withdraw the appeal. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the parties’ Joint Motion to Withdraw is GRANTED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED. 

This order resolves all pending issues and closes the case.

By:_____________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: December 3, 2025

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

These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.

Page 1

RECEIVED 

DEC 038 2025 

= 

= 

Traninfo:db06 

260771691 

12/01/25 

Chikd: 

1891 

Aut: $50.00 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

ID: 

FOLTER LAW GROUP TOLTA 

} 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

10 Middlebelt Property, LLC 

Petitioner, 

v. 

DOCKET #: 

25-002527 

City of Farmington Hills, 

Respondent. 

Parcel ID: 

22-23-23-478-022 

STIPULATION TO WITHDRAW PETITION 

Petitioner, 10 Middlebelt Property, LLC, and Respondent, City of Farmington Hills, through 

their respective authorized representatives, hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 

: 

ERLE 

= 

I. Withdrawal of Petition. '~*"!"’ 

Petitioner voluntarily withdraws the above-captioned property tax appeal filed with the 

Michigan Tax Tribunal concerning the assessment of the property identified hereinabove. 

2. 

No Further Tribunal Action Needed. 

The parties agree that this withdrawal resolves all issues raised in this appeal and that no 

further action by the Tribunal is required, except for entry of an order acknowledging the 

withdrawal. 

3. 

No Admission. 

This stipulation shall nat.be construed as an admission by either party regarding

Page 2

4. 

Costs and Fees. 

Each party shall be responsible for its own costs, fees, and expenses incurred in 

connection with this appeal, unless otherwise stated below: 

5. 

Authority to Sign. 

The individuals executing this stipulation represent that they are authorized to do so on 

behalf of their respective parties. 

Signatures 

PETITIONER 

Name: Stephen Polter (P72591) 

RESPONDENT 

Name: DZbr4 

A 

. Wally 

aa 

Title/Capacity 

J 

Signature: 

Date: 

1/20, 25

Page 3

POLTER LAW GROUP 

wr 

a 

2600 W. BIG BEAVER, SUITE L100 

| TROY, MI 48084 

METROPLEX a A. 

25 NOV 2025PM 14 L 

La 

Lon MTT 

i

DAR DULL 

| ons MT L909 

Ftd del nl

These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.

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

NOTICE OF SEPTEMBER 16 - 30, 2026 PREHEARING GENERAL CALL AND 

ORDER OF PROCEDURE

10 Middlebelt Property LLC,

Petitioner,

v

 

 

City Of Farmington Hills,

Respondent.

 MTT Docket No. 25-002527

Please be advised that 25-002527 has been placed on a two-week Prehearing General 

Call commencing September 16, 2026. Unless ordered otherwise, parties will be 

notified at least 28 days before they are scheduled to appear. Scheduling will not 

necessarily occur in the order in which the cases are listed below.

Parties are required to submit a valuation disclosure or written notification that no 

valuation disclosure is required by the dates indicated herein. A “valuation disclosure” 

is defined as documentary or other tangible evidence in a property tax proceeding that a 

party relies upon in support of the party’s contention as to the true cash value of the 

subject property or any portion thereof and contains the party’s value conclusion and 

data, valuation methodology, analysis or reasoning. See TTR 203 and TTR 241.

Users who file documents with the Tribunal are advised that filed documents are 

public records and will appear for public viewing on the Tribunal’s Tax Docket 

Lookup. If a user wishes to file a document for consideration by the Tribunal and 

prevent its publication on the Tax Docket Lookup, the user MUST file a Motion for 

Protective Order under MCR 2.302(C)(8). If a Protective Order is issued, documents 

covered by the order will not be published. Documents filed prior to the issuance of a 

Protective Order will be published.

In accordance with MCR 1.109(D)(9) and TTR 209, the responsibility for excluding or 

redacting personal identifying information (PII) from all documents filed with or offered to 

the Tribunal rests solely with the parties and their attorneys. The Tribunal is not 

responsible for or required to review, redact, or screen documents at the time of filing 

for PII whether filed electronically or on paper. A party, representative, or interested 

person (i.e. third party not part of an appeal) may request that the Tribunal redact PII 

contained in a previously filed document by submitting a Request for Redactions. The 

Request for Redactions form is available on the Entire Tribunal and Small Claims pages 

of the Tribunal’s website. 

Please refer to the Tribunal’s FAQs and Glossary of Terms pages on the Tribunal’s 

website for more information.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-002527

Page 2 of 3

IT IS ORDERED that the parties shall:

a. If no valuation disclosure is required, notify the Tribunal and the opposing parties 

in writing within 21 days of entry of this order that no valuation disclosure is being 

filed. The notice shall indicate the reason or reasons why no valuation disclosure 

is required (i.e., exemption claim, etc.).

b. If a valuation disclosure is required, file and exchange their valuation disclosures 

by May 20, 2026. Valuation disclosures will not be admitted into evidence unless 

disclosed and furnished in accordance with this order (even though admissible) 

except upon a finding of good cause by the Tribunal.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall file and exchange their Prehearing 

Statements by May 20, 2026. Witnesses, with the exception of rebuttal witnesses, will 

not be allowed to testify unless disclosed in the Prehearing Statement and the 

Prehearing Statement is furnished in accordance with this order except upon a finding 

of good cause by the Tribunal. Failure to file the Prehearing Statement may result in 

holding a party or parties in default. See TTR 237. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that “Pre-Valuation Disclosure” discovery is CLOSED on 

May 20, 2026, which means all discovery has been requested, all Motions to Compel 

have been filed, and all requested or ordered discovery has been exchanged by that 

date. Discovery relative to the valuation disclosure prepared for purposes of litigating 

this case or the valuation expert that prepared that valuation disclosure is not permitted 

during “Pre-Valuation Disclosure” discovery.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that “Post-Valuation Disclosure” discovery is CLOSED on 

September 16, 2026, which means all discovery has been requested, all Motions to 

Compel have been filed, and all requested or ordered discovery has been exchanged 

by that date. “Post-Valuation Disclosure” discovery is limited to the opposing party’s 

valuation disclosure, the opposing party’s valuation expert, and the witnesses identified 

on the opposing party’s Prehearing Statement.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if this case is not scheduled for a date certain 

prehearing conference during the time frame indicated it may be scheduled for a date 

certain prehearing conference at any time subsequent to the completion date for this 

Prehearing General Call. Parties will, however, be notified in writing approximately one 

week before they are scheduled to appear. 

By:_____________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: October 16, 2025

Page 3

MTT Docket No. 25-002527

Page 3 of 3

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 provide by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

Page 4

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

NOTICE OF SEPTEMBER 16 - 30, 2026 PREHEARING GENERAL CALL

Page 5

MT

These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

 

10 MIDDLEBELT PROPERTY, LLC, 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002527 

 

-vs- 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Parcel No. 22-23-23-478-022 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CITY OF FARMINGTON HILLS, 

 

 

Respondent. 

 

POLTER LAW GROUP, P.C. 

Stephen Polter (P72591) 

Attorney for Petitioner 

2600 W. Big Beaver, Ste. L100 

Troy, MI 48084 

(248) 213-6800 

spolter@polterlaw.com 

 

 

 

ROSATI, SCHULTZ JOPPICH & 

 AMTSBUECHLER, P.C. 

Debra A. Walling (P37067) 

Attorney for Respondent 

27555 Executive Drive, Suite 250 

Farmington Hills, MI 48331-3554 

(248) 489-4100 

dwalling@rsjalaw.com 

 

RESPONDENT’S ANSWER TO PETITION 

 

NOW COMES Respondent, CITY OF FARMINGTON HILLS, by and through its 

Attorneys, ROSATI SCHULTZ JOPPICH & AMTSBUECHLER PC, and for its Answer to 

Petitioner's Petition, states as follows: 

1. 

As to Paragraph 1, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein. 

2. 

As to Paragraph 2, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein. 

3. 

As to Paragraph 3, no response is required as no allegations have been made. 

4. 

As to Paragraph 4, no response is required as no allegations have been made. 

5. 

As to Paragraph 5, no response is required as no allegations have been made. 

6. 

As to Paragraph 6, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein.

Page 2

2 

 

7. 

As to Paragraph 7, no response is required as no allegations have been made. 

8. 

As to Paragraph 8, no response is required as no allegations have been made. 

9. 

As to Paragraph 9, no response is required as no allegations have been made. 

10. 

As to Paragraph 10, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein. 

11. 

As to Paragraph 11, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein. 

12. 

As to Paragraph 12, Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained 

therein, lacking knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations and, therefore, leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

13. 

As to Paragraph 13, Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained 

therein, lacking knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations and, therefore, leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

14. 

As to Paragraph 14, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein 

15. 

As to Paragraph 15, no response is required as no allegations have been made. 

16. 

As to Paragraph 16, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein. 

17. 

As to Paragraph 17, Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained 

therein, lacking knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations and, therefore, leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

18. 

As to Paragraph 18, Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations contained 

therein, lacking knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegations and, therefore, leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

19. 

As to Paragraph 19, Respondent denies the allegations contained therein for the 

reason that the allegations are untrue. 

20. 

As to Paragraph 20, no response is required as no allegations have been made.

Page 3

3 

 

WHEREFORE, Respondent, CITY OF FARMINGTON HILLS, requests the Tribunal 

dismiss the Petition, affirm Respondent’s assessed and taxable values, subject to county and state 

equalization, and award Respondent its costs and attorney fees. 

ROSATI SCHULTZ JOPPICH 

& AMTSBUECHLER, PC 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 /s/ Debra A. Walling 

 

 

DEBRA A. WALLING (P37067) 

Attorney for Respondent 

27555 Executive Drive, Suite 250 

Farmington Hills, MI 48331 

(248) 489-4100 

 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

 

Respondent CITY OF FARMINGTON HILLS asserts the following affirmative defenses: 

1. 

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

action against Respondent and to support its claim for relief. 

2. 

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

of law, discrimination, application of wrong principles, or illegality on the part of the Respondent 

or its agents. 

3. 

Petitioner has failed to allege that the mode and method of assessing the subject 

property fails to conform to the mode and method applied in the case of all other properties in 

Respondent's taxing unit for the year in question. 

4. 

Petitioner has failed to allege specific and sufficient facts to establish the true cash 

value, assessed value and taxable value of its property. 

5. 

Petitioner has failed to allege specific and sufficient facts to support its allegation 

that the assessed value of its property, as equalized, is at a factor other than 50% and has also failed 

to allege specific and sufficient facts to support its allegations that the property's taxable value is 

improper.

Page 4

4 

 

6. 

Petitioner has failed to show that any factor other than 50% was applied to the true 

cash value of its property, as well as to the properties of all others, to arrive at the respective 

assessments appearing on the roll. 

7. 

Petitioner, in essence, asks the Tribunal to grant it an illegal preference by 

application of a method of assessment different from that employed in the assessment of other 

properties in the Respondent's taxing unit. 

8. 

Petitioner, in essence, seeks by Petition to challenge the process of county and state 

equalization as to which it has no legal standing and cannot maintain a cause of action. 

9. 

If Petitioner appeared at the Board of Review, Petitioner failed in its appearance 

before the Board of Review to specifically allege: 

a. 

The equalized assessment of the property is more than 50% of its true cash 

value and that the taxable value is in violation of applicable statutory and 

constitutional limitations. 

b. 

The property is assessed in a discriminatory manner and that the assessment 

is a higher level of true cash value than the average level of assessment of all other 

property within the City of Farmington

Page 5

5

These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

Entire Tribunal Case Information Sheet - Respondent

MOAHR DOCKET NO. 25-002527

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact Information

Filer Type: Local Unit of Government

City Of Farmington Hills (OAKLAND)

Local Unit of Government/First Name

M.I.

Last Name

Home Address (No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route)

City or Town

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

Telephone Number

Fax Number

E-mail Address (do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via e-mail)

Section 2: Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information

First Name

Debra

M.I.

A

Last Name

Walling

Firm Name (if any)

Rosati, Schultz, Joppich & Amtsbuechler, P.C.

Address (No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route)

27555 Executive Drive

Suite 250

City or Town

Farmington Hills

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48331

Telephone Number

248-489-4100

Fax Number

E-mail Address (do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via e-mail)

dwalling@rsjalaw.com

Electronic Signature *Typing your name below will serve as your signature

Respondent or Authorized Attorney/Representative’s Signature: 

Debra A. Walling

/s/

These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.

Page 1

RECEIVED 

JUL 29 2025 

we 

Zo 

MICHIG, 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

AN TAX TRIBU NAL 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

10 Middlebelt Property LLC 

Petitioner(s) 

i 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

v 

MTT Docket No.25-002527 

Farmington Hills 

Respondent(s) 

PROOF OF SERVICE FOR PROPERTY TAX PETITION 

*To be filed after the Tribunal issues the Notice of Docket Number* 

Stephen Polter 

states that on July 272.2025 

he/she 

[Name of person serving/mailing petition] 

[date of service] 

served a copy of the Petition relative to the above-captioned matter upon: 

[Provide name and address of the following entities] 

1. Assessor (via certified mail): 

31555 W 11 Mile Rd, Farmington Hills, MI 48336 

2. 

City Clerk or Township Supervisor/Clerk (via certified mai): 

31555 W 11 Mile Rd, Farmington Hills, MI 48336 

3. 

County Equalization Director (via first class mail or personal service): 

250 Elizabeth Lake Rd # 1000W, Pontiac, MI 48341 

4. 

County Clerk (via first class mail or personal service): 

1200 N Telegraph Building #12E, Pontiac, MI 48341 

5. 

Secretary of the local school board (via first class mail or personal service): 

33000 Freedom Rd. 

Farmington MI 48336 

6. 

State Treasurer (via first class mail): 

Michigan Department of Treasury, State Treasurer

Page 2

Polter Lad Cre -EFTR 

sessed 

IRC 

: 

a 

a ASAE 

—- 

A 

<_ 

ew

These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.

Page 1

RECEIVED 

— 

JUN 02 2025 

; 

SS 

Snare 

BET 

Vv 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 §1ATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON 

I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

10 Middlebelt Property LLC 

: 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner(s) 

\'2 

MTT Docket No. 

City of Farmington Hills 

Respondent(s) 

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION 

1. 

Property Parcel No: 22-23-23-478-022 

(If more than one parcel is at issue, attach a completed Multiple Parcel Petition 

Form addressing all other parcels at issue.) 

2, 

The property identified above is 

Xx 

real ___ personal. 

3 

If more than one parcel of real property is under appeal, are the properties 

contiguous? ___ Yes ___ No. 

(If no, separate Petitions are required for each non- 

contiguous parcel.) 

4. 

Are all of the parcels of personal property located on a parcel of real property 

under appeal? ___Yes No. 

(If no, separate Petitions are required for each 

parcel of personal property not located on a parcel of real property under 

appeal.) 

5 

If parcels of personal property are under appeal, when were the personal 

property statements filed by parcel number (attach additional page if necessary): 

6. 

The property identified above is classified as 201Comm

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 

Page 2 of 4 

8. 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

If a protest was required and no protest was made, list the separate and specific 

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the 

assessment or assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 

If the appeal was not submitted by the deadline for the filing of an appeal for the 

classification or classifications of the properties at issue (i.e., May 31 or July 31 

of the tax year involved), list the separate and specific facts upon which 

Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the assessment or 

assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 

The property or properties at issue are located in Oakland 

County. The 

property or properties’ address is: 

29420 TEN MILE 

FARMINGTON HILLS, MI 48334-3110 

The assessment or assessments at issue were established by the (applicable 

local governmental unit): FH 

Petitioner's legal residence or principal office address is: 

29870 MIDDLEBELT STE 200 

FARMINGTON HILLS, MI 48334-2316 

This appeal involves issues relating to the (check all that are applicable): 

X 

the property or properties’ true cash and taxable values 

the property or properties’ taxable value only 

If the property or properties’ taxable value is at issue, is there a 

dispute as to the value of an addition or loss? Yes ___ No 

uniformity of the property or properties’ assessment

Page 3

MTT Docket No. 

Page 3 of 4 

15. 

If more than the current tax year is being appealed, list the separate and specific 

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal's authority over the prior 

tax year or years (attach additional page if necessary): 

16. 

The values for the property identified above as established by Respondent's 

Board of Review are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

Assessed Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

541,140 

270,570 

260,680 

17. 

Petitioner contends that the values for the property identified above are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

400,000 

200,000 

200,000 

18. 

The values in dispute for the property identified above are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

141,140 

70,570 

60,080 

19. 

Petitioner requests the following relief (attach additional page if necessary): 

Reduction of TCV and accordingly AV/TV to more reflect these accurate figures based on comps, 

condition, income, vacancy, etc.

Page 4

MTT Docket No. 

Page 4 of 4 

thorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: 

[} 

NTA 

WAN 

Printed Name of Petitioner's Authorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: 

Stephen Polter 

Email Address: spolter@polterlaw.com 

Mailing Address: 

2600 W Big Beaver, Ste L100, Troy, MI 48084 

Telephone Number: 248-213-6800 

Date: May 25, 2025

Page 5

May 27, 2025 

RECEIVED 

- 

MAY 

8 0 2025 

f= [= 

FAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

EXPRESS PROPERTY TAX APPEALS LLC 

A division of Polter Law Group 

2nd Floor Michigan Tax Tribunal 

2407 N. Grand River Avenue 

Lansing, Michigan 48906 

Re: 

Multiple 2025 PTA 

To whom it may concern, 

This mailing contains sixty-three (“63”) commetcial property tax appeals/petitions and one 

1”) multi 

(2) contiguous residential appeal/petition, along 

with the requisite filing 

fees, as follows: 

gu 

ppeal/p 

8 

q 

8 

SXM LLC v Hadley Twp. (multi — 2) Res., along with 2 checks (#1345-46) for 

$125 ea. 

CCCU v Muskegon/Fruitport, along with 2 checks; one (#1320) for $250, one 

(#1393) for $150 (totaling $400). 

CCCU v Commetce Twp., along with 2 checks; one (#1321) for $250, one (#1391) 

for $150 (totaling $400). 

CCCU v Notton Shotes, along with 1 check (#1319) in the amount of $250. 

TOCU v Sandusky, along with 1 check (#1317) in the amount of $250. 

TOCU v Owosso, along with 1 check (#1318) in the amount of $250. 

W Investors v FH, along with 1 check (#1378) in the amount of $400. 

Rite Aid Cotp (Lewis) v Pinckney, along with 1 check (#1336) in the amount of 

$400. 

Warten Manor v Warren, along with 2 checks; one (#1311) for $600, one (#1390) 

for $25 (totaling $625 — contiguous multi (2)). 

2Changs v N'Ville, along with 2 checks; one (#1350) for $250, one (#1389) for 

$150 (totaling $400). 

5016 Greenfield v Richfield, along with 1 check (#1330) in the amount of $250. 

Springfield v. Hampton, along with 1 check (#1331) in the amount of $400. 

Westbelt v Clawson, along with 1 check (#1337) in the amount of $400. 

CVS (Encote) v Detroit, along with 1 check (#1316) in the amount of $250. 

10 Middlebelt v FH, along with 1 check (#1375) in the amount of $250.

Page 6

° 

X Holdings v Warren, along with 1 check (#1329) in the amount of $400. 

Prism v Mt Pleasant, along with 1 check (#1326) in the amount of $250. 

Mishpat v Sfld., along with 2 checks;

Page 7

JR

These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.

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

10 Middlebelt Property LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

v

MTT Docket No.: 25-002527

City Of Farmington Hills, 

Respondent.

NOTICE OF DOCKET NUMBER

TAKE NOTICE that an Entire Tribunal petition has been filed and the above-noted 

docket number has been assigned to that petition. This docket number shall be noted 

on the petition and the petition shall be served within 45 days of the issuance of 

this Notice, as required by TTR 227 and MCL 205.735a, even if the petition was served 

when filed. A proof of service shall also be filed with the Tribunal within 45 days of the 

issuance of this Notice evidencing the service of the petition. 

If you submitted a proof of service with the petition, you must still serve the petition and 

file a second proof of service including the docket number, pursuant to this Notice. 

Failure to serve the petition and file a proof of service within 45 days of the issuance of 

the Notice may result in the dismissal of this case.

Under TTR 235(1), “[t]he respondent shall file an answer or responsive motion within 28 

days after the date of service of the petition with noted docket number.” Failure to do so 

will result in Respondent being placed in default.

The docket number also needs to be noted on all other documents submitted in this 

case. Further, the assignment of the docket number does not mean that the Tribunal 

has authority over the petition or that the petition complies with statutory requirements 

or the Tribunal’s rules.

By: __Tribunal Clerk________

Entered: June 25, 2025

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

These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.

Page 1

RECEIVED 

— 

JUN 02 2025 

; 

SS 

Snare 

BET 

Vv 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 §1ATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON 

I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

10 Middlebelt Property LLC 

: 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner(s) 

\'2 

MTT Docket No. 

City of Farmington Hills 

Respondent(s) 

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION 

1. 

Property Parcel No: 22-23-23-478-022 

(If more than one parcel is at issue, attach a completed Multiple Parcel Petition 

Form addressing all other parcels at issue.) 

2, 

The property identified above is 

Xx 

real ___ personal. 

3 

If more than one parcel of real property is under appeal, are the properties 

contiguous? ___ Yes ___ No. 

(If no, separate Petitions are required for each non- 

contiguous parcel.) 

4. 

Are all of the parcels of personal property located on a parcel of real property 

under appeal? ___Yes No. 

(If no, separate Petitions are required for each 

parcel of personal property not located on a parcel of real property under 

appeal.) 

5 

If parcels of personal property are under appeal, when were the personal 

property statements filed by parcel number (attach additional page if necessary): 

6. 

The property identified above is classified as 201Comm

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 

Page 2 of 4 

8. 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

If a protest was required and no protest was made, list the separate and specific 

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the 

assessment or assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 

If the appeal was not submitted by the deadline for the filing of an appeal for the 

classification or classifications of the properties at issue (i.e., May 31 or July 31 

of the tax year involved), list the separate and specific facts upon which 

Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the assessment or 

assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 

The property or properties at issue are located in Oakland 

County. The 

property or properties’ address is: 

29420 TEN MILE 

FARMINGTON HILLS, MI 48334-3110 

The assessment or assessments at issue were established by the (applicable 

local governmental unit): FH 

Petitioner's legal residence or principal office address is: 

29870 MIDDLEBELT STE 200 

FARMINGTON HILLS, MI 48334-2316 

This appeal involves issues relating to the (check all that are applicable): 

X 

the property or properties’ true cash and taxable values 

the property or properties’ taxable value only 

If the property or properties’ taxable value is at issue, is there a 

dispute as to the value of an addition or loss? Yes ___ No 

uniformity of the property or properties’ assessment

Page 3

MTT Docket No. 

Page 3 of 4 

15. 

If more than the current tax year is being appealed, list the separate and specific 

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal's authority over the prior 

tax year or years (attach additional page if necessary): 

16. 

The values for the property identified above as established by Respondent's 

Board of Review are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

Assessed Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

541,140 

270,570 

260,680 

17. 

Petitioner contends that the values for the property identified above are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

400,000 

200,000 

200,000 

18. 

The values in dispute for the property identified above are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

141,140 

70,570 

60,080 

19. 

Petitioner requests the following relief (attach additional page if necessary): 

Reduction of TCV and accordingly AV/TV to more reflect these accurate figures based on comps, 

condition, income, vacancy, etc.

Page 4

MTT Docket No. 

Page 4 of 4 

thorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: 

[} 

NTA 

WAN 

Printed Name of Petitioner's Authorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: 

Stephen Polter 

Email Address: spolter@polterlaw.com 

Mailing Address: 

2600 W Big Beaver, Ste L100, Troy, MI 48084 

Telephone Number: 248-213-6800 

Date: May 25, 2025

Page 5

May 27, 2025 

RECEIVED 

- 

MAY 

8 0 2025 

f= [= 

FAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

EXPRESS PROPERTY TAX APPEALS LLC 

A division of Polter Law Group 

2nd Floor Michigan Tax Tribunal 

2407 N. Grand River Avenue 

Lansing, Michigan 48906 

Re: 

Multiple 2025 PTA 

To whom it may concern, 

This mailing contains sixty-three (“63”) commetcial property tax appeals/petitions and one 

1”) multi 

(2) contiguous residential appeal/petition, along 

with the requisite filing 

fees, as follows: 

gu 

ppeal/p 

8 

q 

8 

SXM LLC v Hadley Twp. (multi — 2) Res., along with 2 checks (#1345-46) for 

$125 ea. 

CCCU v Muskegon/Fruitport, along with 2 checks; one (#1320) for $250, one 

(#1393) for $150 (totaling $400). 

CCCU v Commetce Twp., along with 2 checks; one (#1321) for $250, one (#1391) 

for $150 (totaling $400). 

CCCU v Notton Shotes, along with 1 check (#1319) in the amount of $250. 

TOCU v Sandusky, along with 1 check (#1317) in the amount of $250. 

TOCU v Owosso, along with 1 check (#1318) in the amount of $250. 

W Investors v FH, along with 1 check (#1378) in the amount of $400. 

Rite Aid Cotp (Lewis) v Pinckney, along with 1 check (#1336) in the amount of 

$400. 

Warten Manor v Warren, along with 2 checks; one (#1311) for $600, one (#1390) 

for $25 (totaling $625 — contiguous multi (2)). 

2Changs v N'Ville, along with 2 checks; one (#1350) for $250, one (#1389) for 

$150 (totaling $400). 

5016 Greenfield v Richfield, along with 1 check (#1330) in the amount of $250. 

Springfield v. Hampton, along with 1 check (#1331) in the amount of $400. 

Westbelt v Clawson, along with 1 check (#1337) in the amount of $400. 

CVS (Encote) v Detroit, along with 1 check (#1316) in the amount of $250. 

10 Middlebelt v FH, along with 1 check (#1375) in the amount of $250.

Page 6

° 

X Holdings v Warren, along with 1 check (#1329) in the amount of $400. 

Prism v Mt Pleasant, along with 1 check (#1326) in the amount of $250. 

Mishpat v Sfld., along with 2 checks;

Page 7

JR

These are text excerpts, not the complete document. Text recognition and reading order can contain errors. Check the PDF for complete wording, formatting, and context.