Berishaj Investments LLC, Petitioner Vs. Township Of Shelby, 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 

Berishaj Investments LLC, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003202 

 

Shelby Township, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Marcus L. Abood 

 

 

ORDER GRANTING JOINT STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

The Tribunal has reviewed the Stipulation and finds that it comports with the mandates 

of State law.1 As a result, the Tribunal shall enter the parties’ Stipulation. Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that the Joint Stipulation for Entry of Consent Judgment including all 

attachments, terms and conditions is GRANTED and ADOPTED, unless otherwise 

indicated. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the officer charged with maintaining the assessment 

rolls for the tax years at issue shall correct or cause the assessment rolls to be 

corrected to reflect the property’s true cash and taxable values as provided in this 

Consent Judgment within 20 days of the entry of the Consent Judgment.2 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the officer charged with collecting or refunding the 

affected taxes shall collect taxes and any applicable interest or issue a refund as 

required by the Consent Judgment within 28 days of the entry of the Consent 

Judgment. If a refund is warranted, it shall, unless otherwise indicated, include a 

proportionate share of any property tax administration fees paid and of penalty and 

interest paid on delinquent taxes. The refund shall also, unless otherwise indicated, 

separately indicate the amount of the taxes, fees, penalties, and interest being 

refunded. A sum determined by the Tribunal to have been unlawfully paid shall, unless 

otherwise indicated, bear interest from the date of payment to the date of judgment and 

the judgment shall bear interest to the date of its payment. A sum determined by the 

Tribunal to have been underpaid shall not bear interest for any time period prior to 28 

days after the issuance of this Consent Judgment. Pursuant to MCL 205.737, interest 

shall accrue (i) after December 31, 2013, through June 30, 2016, at the rate of 4.25%, 

(ii) after June 30, 2016, through December 31, 2016, at the rate of 4.40%, (iii) after 

December 31, 2016, through June 30, 2017, at the rate of 4.50%, (iv) after June 30, 

 

1 See MCL 211.27a. 

2 See MCL 205.755.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003202 

Page 2 of 2 

 

2017, through December 31, 2017, at the rate of 4.70%, (v) after December 31, 2017, 

through June 30, 2018, at the rate of 5.15%, (vi) after June 30, 2018, through December 

31, 2018, at the rate of 5.41%, (vii) after December 31, 2018, through June 30, 2019, at 

the rate of 5.9%, (viii) after June 30, 2019, through December 31, 2019, at the rate of 

6.39%, (ix) after December 31, 2019, through June 30, 2020, at the rate of 6.40%, (x) 

after June 30 2020, through December 31, 2020, at the rate of 5.63%, (xi) after 

December 31, 2020, through June 30, 2022, at the rate of 4.25%, (xii) after June 30, 

2022, through December 31, 2022, at the rate of 4.27%, (xiii) after December 31, 2022, 

through June 30, 2023, at the rate of 5.65%, (xiv) after June 30, 2023, through 

December 31, 2023, at the rate of 8.25%, (xv) after December 31, 2023, through June 

30, 2024, at the rate of 9.30%, (xvi) after June 30, 2024, through December 31, 2024, at 

the rate of 9.50%, (xvii) after December 31, 2024, through June 30, 2025, at the rate of 

9.47%, and (xviii) after June 30, 2025, through December 31, 2025, at the rate of 

8.66%. 

 

This Consent Judgment resolves all pending claims in this matter and closes this case. 

 

See docket look up for a copy of stipulation and for any possible refund paragraph. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By

 

 

Entered: September 30, 2025 

am 

 

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

62256016.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

Berishaj Investments, LLC, 

Petitioner, 

V 

MTT Docket No. 25-003202 

Shelby Township, 

Respondent. 

_____________________________/ 

Stipulation for Entry of Consent Judgment 

(Exemption) 

1.

The subject property is in Macomb County. 

2.

Property Parcel No: 23-07-24-427-010. 

3.

The subject property is exempt under MCL 211.7ee(1) for the 2025 tax year. The 

property identified above is devoted primarily to agricultural use and therefore exempt 

from tax levied by the local school district for school operating purposes. 

4.

The property’s taxable value (TV), as confirmed by the Board of Review, for the tax year 

at issue: 

Tax Year 

Taxable Value 

2025

$863,565

5.

The TV for the property identified above as stipulated by the parties for settlement purposes 

is: 

Tax Year 

Taxable Value 

2025

$863,565

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003202 

Stipulation for Entry of Consent Judgment 

2 

62256016.1 

6.

List separately any special terms or conditions being proposed by the parties that would 

affect the execution of this Consent Judgment including, but not limited to, the joint 

payment of the refund, the waiver of interest, etc.: 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that refunds shall be 

made payable JOINTLY to Petitioner named herein AND its counsel, 

Honigman LLP, and sent to Stewart Mandell, Honigman LLP, 660 

Woodward, Suite 2290, Detroit, MI 48226. Calculations of the refund 

amount shall also be sent to Petitioner’s counsel at the same address. 

Honigman LLP

Kirk, Huth, Lange & Badalamenti, PLC.

Attorneys for Petitioner

Attorneys for Respondent

By: _______________________________ 

By: /s/ Rosemary V. Davis

Jackie J. Cook (P68781) 

39400 Woodward Avenue, Suite 101 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304-5151 

(248) 566-8474 

jcook@honigman.com

Rosemary V. Davis (P47336) 

Robert S. Huth, Jr. (P42531) 

19500 Hall Road, Suite 100 

Clinton Township, MI 48038 

(586) 412-4900 

rdavis@kirkhuthlaw.com

Dated: September 26, 2025 

Dated: September 26, 2025

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

62256016.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

Berishaj Investments, LLC, 

Petitioner, 

V 

MTT Docket No. 25-003202 

Shelby Township, 

Respondent. 

_____________________________/ 

Stipulation for Entry of Consent Judgment 

(Exemption) 

1.

The subject property is in Macomb County. 

2.

Property Parcel No: 23-07-24-427-010. 

3.

The subject property is exempt under MCL 211.7ee(1) for the 2025 tax year. The 

property identified above is devoted primarily to agricultural use and therefore exempt 

from tax levied by the local school district for school operating purposes. 

4.

The property’s taxable value (TV), as confirmed by the Board of Review, for the tax year 

at issue: 

Tax Year 

Taxable Value 

2025

$863,565

5.

The TV for the property identified above as stipulated by the parties for settlement purposes 

is: 

Tax Year 

Taxable Value 

2025

$863,565

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003202 

Stipulation for Entry of Consent Judgment 

2 

62256016.1 

6.

List separately any special terms or conditions being proposed by the parties that would 

affect the execution of this Consent Judgment including, but not limited to, the joint 

payment of the refund, the waiver of interest, etc.: 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that refunds shall be 

made payable JOINTLY to Petitioner named herein AND its counsel, 

Honigman LLP, and sent to Stewart Mandell, Honigman LLP, 660 

Woodward, Suite 2290, Detroit, MI 48226. Calculations of the refund 

amount shall also be sent to Petitioner’s counsel at the same address. 

Honigman LLP

Kirk, Huth, Lange & Badalamenti, PLC.

Attorneys for Petitioner

Attorneys for Respondent

By: _______________________________ 

By: /s/ Rosemary V. Davis

Jackie J. Cook (P68781) 

39400 Woodward Avenue, Suite 101 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304-5151 

(248) 566-8474 

jcook@honigman.com

Rosemary V. Davis (P47336) 

Robert S. Huth, Jr. (P42531) 

19500 Hall Road, Suite 100 

Clinton Township, MI 48038 

(586) 412-4900 

rdavis@kirkhuthlaw.com

Dated: September 26, 2025 

Dated: September 26, 2025

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

KIRK , HUTH , LANGE & BADALAMENTI , P . L . C . 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SYSTEM 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

BERISHAJ INVESTMENTS LLC, 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003202 

vs. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Parcel No. 23-07-24-427-010 

CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF SHELBY, 

 

Respondent. 

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

HONIGMAN LLP 

JACKIE J. COOK (P68781) 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

39400 Woodward Avenue, Suite 101 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304 

(248) 566-8474 

jcook@honigman.com 

 

KIRK, HUTH, LANGE & BADALAMENTI, PLC 

ROSEMARY V. DAVIS (P47336) 

ROBERT S. HUTH, JR. (P42531) 

Attorneys for Respondent 

19500 Hall Road, Suite 100 

Clinton Township, MI 48038 

(586) 412-4900 

rdavis@kirkhuthlaw.com 

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

RESPONDENT’S ANSWER TO PETITION 

 

 

NOW COMES the Respondent, CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF SHELBY, by and through 

its attorneys, KIRK, HUTH, LANGE & BADALAMENTI, PLC, and for its Answer to Petition, 

states as follows: 

1. 

Answering Paragraph 1, Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to 

form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth therein and therefore leaves Petitioner to its 

strict proofs. 

2. 

Answering Paragraph 2, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein. 

3. 

Answering Paragraph 3, Respondent states that the paragraph is not applicable. 

4. 

Answering Paragraph 4, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein. 

5. 

Answering Paragraph 5, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein. 

6. 

Answering Paragraph 6, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein.

Page 2

2 

S:\S\Shelby\Tax Tribunals\Berishaj Invs. 25-003202\Answer to Petition, AD & POS.doc 

KIRK , HUTH , LANGE & BADALAMENTI , P . L . C . 

7. 

Answering Paragraph 7, Respondent denies the allegations contained therein for the 

reason they are untrue. 

8. 

Answering Paragraph 8, Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to 

form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth therein and therefore leaves Petitioner to its 

strict proofs. 

9. 

Answering Paragraph 9, Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to 

form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth therein and therefore leaves Petitioner to its 

strict proofs. 

10. 

Answering Paragraph 10, Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to 

form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth therein and therefore leaves Petitioner to its 

strict proofs. 

11. 

Answering Paragraph 11, Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to 

form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth therein and therefore leaves Petitioner to its 

strict proofs. 

12. 

Answering Paragraph 12, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein. 

13. 

Answering Paragraph 13, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein. 

14. 

Answering Paragraph 14, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein. 

15. 

Answering Paragraph 15, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein. 

16. 

Answering Paragraph 16, Respondent requests that the Tribunal deny the relief 

requested and uphold the assessment issued. 

17. 

Answering Paragraph 17, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein.

Page 3

3 

S:\S\Shelby\Tax Tribunals\Berishaj Invs. 25-003202\Answer to Petition, AD & POS.doc 

KIRK , HUTH , LANGE & BADALAMENTI , P . L . C . 

Count I – The subject property qualifies for the 

Qualified Agricultural Exemption under MCL 211.733 

 

18. 

Answering Paragraph 18, Respondent incorporates by reference the responses to 

all preceding paragraphs as though fully restated herein. 

19. 

Answering Paragraph 19, Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to 

form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth therein and therefore leaves Petitioner to its 

strict proofs. 

20. 

Answering Paragraph 20, Respondent admits the allegations contained therein. 

21. 

Answering Paragraph 21, Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to 

form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth therein and therefore leaves Petitioner to its 

strict proofs. 

22. 

Answering Paragraph 22, Respondent states no response is necessary as the statute 

speaks for itself. 

23. 

Answering Paragraph 23, Respondent states no response is necessary as the statute 

speaks for itself. 

24. 

Answering Paragraph 24, Respondent states no response is necessary as the statute 

speaks for itself. 

25. 

Answering Paragraph 25, Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to 

form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth therein and therefore leaves Petitioner to its 

strict proofs. 

26. 

Answering Paragraph 26, Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to 

form a belief as to the truth of the allegations set forth therein and therefore leaves Petitioner to its

Page 4

4 

S:\S\Shelby\Tax Tribunals\Berishaj Invs. 25-003202\Answer to Petition, AD & POS.doc 

KIRK , HUTH , LANGE & BADALAMENTI , P . L . C . 

strict proofs. The Township was denied a walk-through of the property and therefore was unable to 

verify the use of the property. 

27. 

Answering Paragraph 27, Respondent states no response is necessary as the statute 

speaks for itself. 

28. 

Answering Paragraph 28, Respondent states no response is necessary as the statute 

speaks for itself. 

29. 

Answering Paragraph 29, Respondent states no response is necessary as the statute 

speaks for itself. 

30. 

Answering Paragraph 30, Respondent states no response is necessary as the statute 

speaks for itself. 

31. 

Answering Paragraph 31, Respondent states no response is necessary as the statute 

speaks for itself. 

32. 

Answering Paragraph 32, Respondent denies the allegations contained therein for 

the reason they are untrue. 

WHEREFORE, Respondent respectfully requests that this Honorable Tribunal dismiss 

Petitioners’ Petition and

Page 5

5

Page 6

6

Page 7

7

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. 25-003202

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact Information

Filer Type: Local Unit of Government

Township Of Shelby (MACOMB)

Local Unit of Government/First Name

Rosemary

M.I.

Last Name

Davis

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

19500 Hall Road, Ste. 100

City or Town

Clinton Township

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48038

Telephone Number

586-412-4900

Fax Number

586-412-4949

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

rdavis@kirkhuthlaw.com

Section 2: Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information

First Name

Rosemary

M.I.

V.

Last Name

Davis

Firm Name (if any)

Kirk, Huth, Lange & Badalamenti, PLC

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

19500 Hall Road

Ste. 100

City or Town

Clinton Township

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48038

Telephone Number

5864124900

Fax Number

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

rdavis@kirkhuthlaw.com

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

Respondent or Authorized Attorney/Representative’s Signature: 

Rosemary V. Davis

/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

25-0087 

61764946.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Berishaj Investments, LLC, 

Petitioner, 

v 

Shelby Township, 

Respondent. 

MTT Docket No. 

Parcel No. 23-07-24-427-010 

Jackie J. Cook (P68781) 

Honigman LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

39400 Woodward Avenue, Suite 101 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304 

(248) 566-8474 

jcook@honigman.com

Tax Year 2025 Petition 

Petitioner, Berishaj Investments, LLC, by and through its attorneys, Honigman LLP, for 

its Petition against Respondent, Shelby Township, states as follows: 

Parties and Subject Property 

1.

Petitioner is a Michigan limited liability company with a principal office located at 

2600 W. Big Beaver Rd., Troy, MI 48084-3342. 

2.

Petitioner owns and/or leases real property, assessed under tax parcel no. 23-07-24-

427-010, located at 15090 Commercial Dr., Shelby Township, Michigan (the “subject property”). 

3.

Petitioner is identified as the taxpayer on the assessment roll for the subject 

property.

Page 2

2 

61764946.1 

4.

Petitioner is a party in interest with respect to the taxable status and property tax 

assessment of the subject property under MCL 205.735a(6). 

5.

Respondent, Shelby Township (the “Township”), is a township located in Macomb 

County, Michigan. 

6.

For tax year 2025, the subject property was classified “Industrial Improved.” 

7.

The subject property was designed and is presently used for agricultural purposes. 

8.

In particular, the subject property is occupied for growing cannabis plants. 

9.

Like other agricultural operations, the activities involved in growing the plants 

include planting, pruning, spraying, irrigating, and harvesting. 

10.

The subject property is used for agricultural purposes by supporting the daily 

monitoring and care of the plants as they develop through their life cycle. 

11.

The subject property is devoted primarily to agricultural use. 

2025 Assessment Protest to the Board of Review and Jurisdiction 

12.

Petitioner timely submitted a Claim for Farmland (Qualified Agricultural) 

Exemption from Some School Operating Taxes, Form 2599 (“QAE application”) to the assessor. 

App. 1 to Appendix A. 

13.

The assessor denied the QAE application. App. 2 to Appendix A. 

14.

Petitioner timely protested the assessor’s QAE application denial to the July Board 

of Review. Appendix A. 

15.

The July Board of Review denied Petitioner’s protest. Appendix B. 

16.

Petitioner hereby appeals the July Board of Review’s QAE application denial and 

requests that this Tax Tribunal grant the subject property the Qualified Agricultural Exemption. 

17.

The Tax Tribunal has jurisdiction of this Petition.

Page 3

3 

61764946.1 

Count I – The subject property qualifies for 

the Qualified Agricultural Exemption under MCL 211.7ee 

18.

Petitioner realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations made above and 

below as though restated herein. 

19.

This count involves issues relating to: (a) uniformity and (b) exemption. 

20.

For tax year 2025, the Township determined the following taxable value and 

assessed value for the subject property, which will result in a state equalized value in the same 

amount based on the tentative equalization factor: 

Parcel No. 

Assessed Value 

Taxable Value 

23-07-24-427-010 

$1,095,000 

$863,565 

21.

The subject property qualifies for the Qualified Agricultural Exemption under MCL 

211.7ee because it is devoted primarily to agricultural use. 

22.

MCL 211.7ee, provides: 

(1) Qualified agricultural property is exempt from the tax levied by a local 

school district for school operating purposes […] 

* 

* 

* 

(6) An owner of property that is qualified agricultural property on May 1 for 

which an exemption was not on the tax roll may file an appeal with the July or 

December board of review in the year the exemption was claimed or the 

immediately succeeding year. An owner of property that is qualified agricultural 

property on May 1 for which an exemption was denied by the assessor in the year 

the affidavit was filed, may file an appeal with the July board of review for summer 

taxes or, if there is not a summer levy of school operating taxes, with the December 

board of review. 

23.

“Qualified agricultural property” is defined in MCL 211.7dd(d) as “unoccupied 

property and related buildings located on property devoted primarily to agricultural use as defined 

in section 36101 [MCL 324.36101] of the natural resources and environmental protection act.”

Page 4

4 

61764946.1 

24.

“Agricultural use” is defined in MCL 324.36101(b) as “the production of plants 

and animals useful to humans including […] Christmas trees, and other similar uses and activities”: 

"Agricultural use" means “the production of plants and animals useful to humans, 

including forages and sod crops; grains, feed crops, and field crops; dairy and dairy 

products; poultry and poultry products; livestock, including breeding and grazing 

of cattle, swine, captive cervidae, and similar animals; berries; herbs; flowers; 

seeds; grasses; nursery stock; fruits; vegetables; maple syrup production; Christmas 

trees; and other similar uses and activities…” MCL 211.7dd(d) and MCL 

324.36101(b). 

25.

The definition includes all plants useful to humans without exclusion. 

26.

The subject property is used for growing and harvesting cannabis plants; more 

specifically, marihuana plants – plants with seeds of the genus Cannabis. MCL 333.27953(h). 

27.

Michigan has declared cannabis useful to humans in the Michigan Medical 

Marihuana Act, Initiated Law 1 of 2008, at MCL 333.26422(a):

The people of the State of Michigan find and declare that … [m]odern medical 

research, including as found by the National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of 

Medicine in a March 1999 report, has discovered beneficial uses for marihuana in 

treating or alleviating the pain, nausea, and other symptoms associated with a 

variety of debilitating medical conditions. 

28.

The Michigan Legislature has codified that cannabis is useful to

Page 5

5

Page 6

6

Page 7

7

Page 8

25

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

Berishaj Investments LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

v

MTT Docket No.: 25-003202

Township Of Shelby, 

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: September 4, 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

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Berishaj Investments, LLC, 

Petitioner, 

v 

MTT Docket No. 2 5 - orplipa 

Parcel No. 23-07-24-427-010 

Shelby Township, 

Respondent. 

Jackie J. Cook (P68781) 

Honigman LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

39400 Woodward Avenue, Suite 101 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304 

(248) 566-8474 

k(@honig gman.com 

Proof of Service 

Lisa Joseph states that she is employed by Honigman LLP, attorneys for Petitioner, and 

that on 

g 1 2( / 2S 

| 

she did serve a copy of Petitioner's Tax Year 2025 Petition, with 

docket number, upon the parties named on the attached list. 

51] 

oc 

(of Fes 

Qpocets 

Dated: 

5 

>| 

2S 

Lisa Joseph 

25-0087 

61764946.1

Page 2

BY CERTIFIED UNITED STATES MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED: 

CLERK 

SHELBY TWP. - MACOMB 

52700 VAN DYKE 

SHELBY TWP., MI 48316 

ASSESSOR 

SHELBY TWP. 

- MACOMB 

52700 VAN DYKE 

SHELBY TWP., MI 48316 

AND BY FIRST-CLASS UNITED STATES MAIL: 

CLERK 

MACOMB COUNTY 

ATTN: F. KRYCIA ADM BLDG. 

1 S. MAIN ST., 8TH FLOOR 

MT. CLEMENS, MI 48043 

DIRECTOR OF EQUALIZATION 

MACOMB COUNTY 

ATTN: F. KRYCIA ADM BLDG. 

1 S. MAIN ST., 8TH FLOOR 

MT. CLEMENS, MI 48043 

SECRETARY OF SCHOOL BOARD 

UTICA COMMUNITY SCHOOLS 

11303 GREENDALE DRIVE 

STERLING HEIGHTS, MI 48312-2925 

STATE TREASURER 

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY 

TREASURY BUILDING 

430 W. ALLEGAN ST. 

LANSING, MI 48922 

25-0089 

61764946.1

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

25-0087 

61764946.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Berishaj Investments, LLC, 

Petitioner, 

v 

Shelby Township, 

Respondent. 

MTT Docket No. 

Parcel No. 23-07-24-427-010 

Jackie J. Cook (P68781) 

Honigman LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

39400 Woodward Avenue, Suite 101 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304 

(248) 566-8474 

jcook@honigman.com

Tax Year 2025 Petition 

Petitioner, Berishaj Investments, LLC, by and through its attorneys, Honigman LLP, for 

its Petition against Respondent, Shelby Township, states as follows: 

Parties and Subject Property 

1.

Petitioner is a Michigan limited liability company with a principal office located at 

2600 W. Big Beaver Rd., Troy, MI 48084-3342. 

2.

Petitioner owns and/or leases real property, assessed under tax parcel no. 23-07-24-

427-010, located at 15090 Commercial Dr., Shelby Township, Michigan (the “subject property”). 

3.

Petitioner is identified as the taxpayer on the assessment roll for the subject 

property.

Page 2

2 

61764946.1 

4.

Petitioner is a party in interest with respect to the taxable status and property tax 

assessment of the subject property under MCL 205.735a(6). 

5.

Respondent, Shelby Township (the “Township”), is a township located in Macomb 

County, Michigan. 

6.

For tax year 2025, the subject property was classified “Industrial Improved.” 

7.

The subject property was designed and is presently used for agricultural purposes. 

8.

In particular, the subject property is occupied for growing cannabis plants. 

9.

Like other agricultural operations, the activities involved in growing the plants 

include planting, pruning, spraying, irrigating, and harvesting. 

10.

The subject property is used for agricultural purposes by supporting the daily 

monitoring and care of the plants as they develop through their life cycle. 

11.

The subject property is devoted primarily to agricultural use. 

2025 Assessment Protest to the Board of Review and Jurisdiction 

12.

Petitioner timely submitted a Claim for Farmland (Qualified Agricultural) 

Exemption from Some School Operating Taxes, Form 2599 (“QAE application”) to the assessor. 

App. 1 to Appendix A. 

13.

The assessor denied the QAE application. App. 2 to Appendix A. 

14.

Petitioner timely protested the assessor’s QAE application denial to the July Board 

of Review. Appendix A. 

15.

The July Board of Review denied Petitioner’s protest. Appendix B. 

16.

Petitioner hereby appeals the July Board of Review’s QAE application denial and 

requests that this Tax Tribunal grant the subject property the Qualified Agricultural Exemption. 

17.

The Tax Tribunal has jurisdiction of this Petition.

Page 3

3 

61764946.1 

Count I – The subject property qualifies for 

the Qualified Agricultural Exemption under MCL 211.7ee 

18.

Petitioner realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations made above and 

below as though restated herein. 

19.

This count involves issues relating to: (a) uniformity and (b) exemption. 

20.

For tax year 2025, the Township determined the following taxable value and 

assessed value for the subject property, which will result in a state equalized value in the same 

amount based on the tentative equalization factor: 

Parcel No. 

Assessed Value 

Taxable Value 

23-07-24-427-010 

$1,095,000 

$863,565 

21.

The subject property qualifies for the Qualified Agricultural Exemption under MCL 

211.7ee because it is devoted primarily to agricultural use. 

22.

MCL 211.7ee, provides: 

(1) Qualified agricultural property is exempt from the tax levied by a local 

school district for school operating purposes […] 

* 

* 

* 

(6) An owner of property that is qualified agricultural property on May 1 for 

which an exemption was not on the tax roll may file an appeal with the July or 

December board of review in the year the exemption was claimed or the 

immediately succeeding year. An owner of property that is qualified agricultural 

property on May 1 for which an exemption was denied by the assessor in the year 

the affidavit was filed, may file an appeal with the July board of review for summer 

taxes or, if there is not a summer levy of school operating taxes, with the December 

board of review. 

23.

“Qualified agricultural property” is defined in MCL 211.7dd(d) as “unoccupied 

property and related buildings located on property devoted primarily to agricultural use as defined 

in section 36101 [MCL 324.36101] of the natural resources and environmental protection act.”

Page 4

4 

61764946.1 

24.

“Agricultural use” is defined in MCL 324.36101(b) as “the production of plants 

and animals useful to humans including […] Christmas trees, and other similar uses and activities”: 

"Agricultural use" means “the production of plants and animals useful to humans, 

including forages and sod crops; grains, feed crops, and field crops; dairy and dairy 

products; poultry and poultry products; livestock, including breeding and grazing 

of cattle, swine, captive cervidae, and similar animals; berries; herbs; flowers; 

seeds; grasses; nursery stock; fruits; vegetables; maple syrup production; Christmas 

trees; and other similar uses and activities…” MCL 211.7dd(d) and MCL 

324.36101(b). 

25.

The definition includes all plants useful to humans without exclusion. 

26.

The subject property is used for growing and harvesting cannabis plants; more 

specifically, marihuana plants – plants with seeds of the genus Cannabis. MCL 333.27953(h). 

27.

Michigan has declared cannabis useful to humans in the Michigan Medical 

Marihuana Act, Initiated Law 1 of 2008, at MCL 333.26422(a):

The people of the State of Michigan find and declare that … [m]odern medical 

research, including as found by the National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of 

Medicine in a March 1999 report, has discovered beneficial uses for marihuana in 

treating or alleviating the pain, nausea, and other symptoms associated with a 

variety of debilitating medical conditions. 

28.

The Michigan Legislature has codified that cannabis is useful to

Page 5

5

Page 6

6

Page 7

7

Page 8

25

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 - Petitioner

MOAHR DOCKET NO. 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information

Filer type: Organization

First Name/Company Name

M.I.

Last Name

Berishaj Investments, LLC

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

2600 W. Big Beaver Rd.

City or Town

Troy

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48084-3342

Telephone Number

2485668300

Fax Number

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

ljoseph@honigman.com

Section 2: Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information

First Name

Jackie

M.I.

J.

Last Name

Cook

Firm Name (if any)

Honigman LLP

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

39400 Woodward Avenue Suite 101

City or Town

Bloomfield Hills

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48304

Telephone Number

248-566-8474

Fax Number

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

jcook@honigman.com

Section 5: Issue

Please designate one: 

Valuation – Fill out Sections 4, 5, & 6 below

Section 6: Subject Property Information

How many parcels are you 

appealing?1

Property Address (No., Street, City, ST, ZIP) [If multiple, list first property’s address]

Michigan

Taxing Authority (City or Township)

Township Of Shelby (MACOMB)

County

Macomb

If you are appealing more than one parcel, are they contiguous or adjoining? 

(*If no, you must file separate appeals for each non-contiguous or non-adjoining parcel.)

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

Section 7: Check which of the following you are appealing (check all that apply)

True Cash and Taxable Values, Other (please explain)

Section 8: Valuation Information for Each Parcel under Appeal

Parcel Number:

23-07-24-427-010

Classification of Property: Real 

Industrial

Current Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value) as established by the Board of Review:

1095000

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

863565

What do you believe is the fair market value (also known as True Cash Value)?

0

Multiply the True Cash Value by 50% and enter here. This is your contention of Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value).

0

If you belive the Taxable Value differs from your contention of Assessed Value, enter your contention of Taxable Value.

Section 9: Assessment Information

Type of Tax Assessment(s):

Assessment Number(s):

Check all that is being appealed: 

Check what action prompted this appeal:

If “other,” please explain:

Section 10: Special Assessment Information

Type of Special Assessment:

Did you protest the special assessment at the hearing held to confirm the special assessment roll? 

If Yes, what was the date of the hearing held to confirm the special assessment roll?

If No, please explain:

Section 11: Classification Information

Parcel Number:

Current Classification of Property as established by Board of Review: 

What do you believe is the property’s classification?

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

If improved property, how is the property currently being used?

If improved property, for what use was the property designed?

Fee Information

The filing fee is based on the greater of State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention. If you are appealing more than one parcel, the parcel with the highest 

State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention will be used to determine your filing fee, plus $25.00 will be added for each additional parcel being appealed.

If the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention is: Your filing fee is:

 

 $100,000.00 and under $250.00

 $100,000.01 to $500,000.00 $400.00

 $Over $500,000.00 $600.00

* Plus $25.00 for each additional parcel, not to exceed a total filing fee of $2,000.00.

A fee of $250.00 is required for the filing of a Special Assessment Appeal.

A fee of $250.00 is required for the filing of an Equalization Tax Appeal.

A fee of $250.00 is required for the filing of a Non-Property Tax Appeal.

A fee of $150.00 is required for the filing of a Classification Tax Appeal

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

Petitioner or Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Signature: 

/s/ Jackie J. Cook

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.