Denso International America Inc Petitioner Vs. City Of Southfield 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

NOTICE OF JUNE 16- 30, 2027 PREHEARING GENERAL CALL AND ORDER OF 

PROCEDURE

Denso International America Inc,

Petitioner,

v

 

 

City Of Southfield,

Respondent.

 MTT Docket No. 26-000958

Please be advised that 26-000958 has been placed on a two-week Prehearing General 

Call commencing June 16, 2027. 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covered by the order will not be published.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. 26-000958

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 February 17, 2027. 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 February 17, 2027. 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 

February 17, 2027, 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 

June 16, 2027, 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

Page 3

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

25-0029 

75146418.1.220879.396181 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Denso International America Inc, 

Petitioner, 

v 

City of Southfield, 

Respondent. 

MTT Docket No. 

Parcel No. 76-24-20-326-228 

Jackie J. Cook (P68781) 

Honigman LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

2290 First National Building 

660 Woodward Avenue 

Detroit, MI 48226-3506 

(313) 465-7270 

jcook@honigman.com

Petition 

Denso International America Inc., (“Denso” or “Petitioner”), through its attorneys, 

Honigman LLP, says: 

1.

Denso’s principal office and place of business is located at 24777 Denso Drive, 

Southfield, MI 48033. 

2.

The subject real property, parcel no. 76-24-20-326-228, is located at 24777 Denso 

Drive, Southfield, MI 48033 in Oakland County (“Petitioner’s Property”). 

3.

Respondent, City of Southfield, assesses and collects property taxes on Petitioner's 

Property.

Page 2

2 

75146418.1.220879.396181 

4.

In 2026, Respondent’s board of review determined the taxable value of Petitioner's 

Property to be $15,020,560 and assessed Petitioner's Property at $15,020,560, which will result in 

a state equalized value in the same amount based upon the tentative equalization factor. 

5.

Petitioner's Property is classified as commercial improved. 

6.

Petitioner's Property is presently used or available for use for commercial purposes. 

7.

Petitioner believes that Petitioner's Property was originally designed to be used for 

commercial purposes. 

8.

This matter involves issues relating to (a) valuation, (b) assessment, (c) taxable 

value, and (d) due process, equal protection, and uniformity. 

9.

At this time, Petitioner believes, as it relates to taxable value, that there is a dispute 

relative to the value of a loss. 

10.

No board of review protest was required for Petitioner’s Property. 

11.

The 2026 assessment – including the state equalized and taxable values – imposed 

on Petitioner's Property, the taxes to be levied and collected on Petitioner’s Property, and the mode 

of assessment adopted by Respondent are invalid, unlawful, and operate as a fraud on Petitioner, 

because they 

(a) 

Exceed amounts permitted by the Michigan Constitution and applicable 

statutes; 

(b) 

Are calculated at or derived from higher percentages of true cash value than 

permissible under the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes; 

(c) 

Are based on the application of wrong principles and an erroneous 

determination of the true cash value of that portion of Petitioner's Property that 

is taxable under Michigan law, if any; and

Page 3

3 

75146418.1.220879.396181 

(d) 

Discriminate against Petitioner and deny Petitioner its constitutional rights to 

uniformity, equal protection, and due process of law. 

WHEREFORE, Petitioner requests that the Tax Tribunal enter an Order: (i) reducing the 

2026 taxable value of Petitioner's Property from $15,020,560 to $10,000,000; (ii) reducing the 

2026 assessed value and state equalized value of Petitioner's Property from $15,020,560 to 

$10,000,000; (iii) requiring payment to Petitioner of the refunds attributable to such reductions, 

plus interest and costs; and (iv) awarding Petitioner any other relief to which it is entitled. 

Dated: May 14, 2026

Respectfully submitted, 

Honigman LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

By:

Jackie J. Cook (P68781) 

2290 First National Building 

660 Woodward Avenue 

Detroit, MI 48226-3506 

(313) 465-7270 

jcook@honigman.com

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

Entire Tribunal Case Information Sheet - Petitioner

MTT DOCKET NO. 

 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information

Filer type: 

Organization 

Local Unit of Government

First Name

M.I.

Last Name/Company Name

Denso International America Inc

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

24777 Denso Drive

City or Town

Southfield

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48033

Telephone Number

3134657270

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

jcook@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

(313) 465-7420

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

jcook@honigman.com

 

Section 3: Issue 

Please designate one: 

Valuation 

 

Section 4: Subject Property Information 

How many parcels are you 

appealing?

1

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

24777 Denso Drive

Southfield

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

Michigan

48033

Taxing Authority (City or Township)

City Of Southfield (OAKLAND) 

County

Oakland

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.)

N/A

 

 

Section 5: Check which of the following you are appealing (check all that apply) 

True Cash and Taxable Values

If “Other”, please explain:

 

 

Section 6: Valuation Information for Each Parcel under Appeal

Parcel Number:

76-24-20-326-228

Classification of Property: Real (check one)

Commercial (check one)

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

15020560

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

15020560

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

20000000

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

10000000

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

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.

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

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

Payment Information

Amount: 600

Success: True

Message: ""

Waiver Code:

Transaction Number: 26051485408598

Supporting Waiver Documents:

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

Denso International America Inc, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

v

MTT Docket No.: 26-000958

City Of Southfield, 

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: July 8, 2026

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

1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

DENSO INTERNATIONAL AMERICA INC, 

Petitioner, 

v 

CITY OF SOUTHFIELD, 

Respondent. 

MTT Docket No. 26-000958 

Parcel No. 76-24-20-326-228 

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

JACKIE J. COOK (P68781) 

HONIGMAN LLP 

Attorney for Petitioner 

2290 First National Building 

660 Woodward Avenue 

Detroit, MI 48226-3506 

(313) 465-7270

LAURA M. HALLAHAN (P42101) 

SETH A. O’LOUGHLIN (P80257) 

KELSEA M. MELCHER (P85821) 

HALLAHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 

Attorneys for Respondent 

1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302 

(248) 731-3089

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

CORRECTED PROOF OF SERVICE 

(Answer to Petition and Affirmative Defenses) 

On the date below I sent by electronic mail a copy of Respondent’s Answer to Petition and 

Affirmative Defenses, and Proof of Mailing to: 

Jackie J. Cook 

Honigman LLP 

jcook@honigman.com 

I declare that the statement above is true to the best of my information, knowledge and belief. 

/s/ Kelsea M. Melcher_______________ 

Dated: July 6, 2026 

Kelsea M. Melcher 

On the date below I sent by first class mail a copy of the Respondent’s Answer to Petition and 

Affirmative Defenses, Proof of Mailing, and Corrected Proof of Service to: 

Jackie J. Cook 

Honigman LLP 

2290 First National Building 

660 Woodward Avenue 

Detroit, MI 48226-3506 

I declare that the statement above is true to the best of my information, knowledge and belief. 

/s/ Kelsea M. Melcher_______________ 

Dated: July 7, 2026 

Kelsea M. Melcher

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

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

Docket Number: 26-000958

Is this case currently pending in the Small Claims Division? No

Party Filing Document 

Respondent

Files

Document Type: Proof of Service: Misc Documents

Attachment File Name: Correct POS_Answer_Denso_FINAL

Fee Information

Filing Fee: $ 0.00

Payment Information

Payment: $ 0.00

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 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

DENSO INTERNATIONAL AMERICA INC, 

 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

v 

 

CITY OF SOUTHFIELD, 

 

 

 

Respondent. 

 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 26-000958 

 

Parcel No. 76-24-20-326-228 

 

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

JACKIE J. COOK (P68781) 

HONIGMAN LLP 

Attorney for Petitioner 

2290 First National Building 

660 Woodward Avenue 

Detroit, MI 48226-3506 

(313) 465-7270 

 

LAURA M. HALLAHAN (P42101) 

SETH A. O’LOUGHLIN (P80257) 

KELSEA M. MELCHER (P85821) 

HALLAHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 

Attorneys for Respondent 

1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302 

(248) 731-3089 

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

ANSWER TO PETITION 

AND 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

 

ANSWER 

 

Respondent, City of Southfield, by and through its attorneys, Hallahan & Associates, P.C., 

responds to the allegations made in Petitioner’s Petition as follows: 

1. 

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

truth of the allegations set forth in Paragraph 1 and, therefore, leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

2. 

Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 2 as to parcel number, address, and 

location. Respondent lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of 

the remainder of the allegations set forth in Paragraph 2 and, therefore, leaves Petitioner to its 

proofs.

Page 2

2

3. 

Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 3. 

4. 

Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 4. 

5. 

Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 5. 

6. 

Upon information and belief, Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 6. 

7. 

Respondent lacks the information and knowledge necessary to respond to the truth 

of the allegations set forth in Paragraph 7 and, therefore, leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

8. 

Respondent acknowledges the issues raised by Petitioner in Paragraph 8 but denies 

that those issues have merit and further denies that Petitioner is entitled to any relief. 

9. 

Respondent acknowledges Petitioner’s belief of a dispute relative to the value of a 

loss but denies that such a loss has occurred. 

10. 

Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations in Paragraph 10 as the General 

Property Tax Act speaks for itself. 

11. 

Respondent denies the allegations in Paragraph 11, including subparagraphs (a)-

(d), for the reason that the same are untrue. In further answer, the assessed, state equalized and/or 

taxable values do not exceed permitted amounts, do not exceed the percentage of true cash value 

permitted by law, were correctly determined and are based upon correct application of proper 

principles, and the values and Respondent’s mode of assessment are non-discriminatory and 

constitutional. 

12. 

Respondent acknowledges the relief requested by Petitioner in the final paragraph 

of its Petition but denies that Petitioner is entitled to the requested relief due to the statements in 

the above Paragraphs.

Page 3

3

 

WHEREFORE, Respondent, City of Southfield, 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. 

 

HALLAHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 

 

/s/Laura M. Hallahan______________ 

LAURA M. HALLAHAN (P42101) 

SETH A. O’LOUGHLIN (P80257) 

KELSEA M. MELCHER (P85821) 

Attorneys for Respondent 

1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302 

Dated: July 6, 2026 

 

 

 

 

(248) 731-3089 

 

 

 

 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

 

Respondent, City of Southfield, asserts the following affirmative defenses: 

1. 

Petitioner fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to set forth a cause of action 

against Respondent and to support its claim for relief. 

2. 

The Tribunal is charged with finding a property’s true cash value to determine the 

property’s lawful assessment. Alhi Development Co v Orion Twp, 110 Mich App 764, 767 (1981). 

3. 

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

MCL 205.737(3) and Kern v Pontiac Twp, 93 Mich App 612 (1974). 

4. 

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 Respondent or 

its agents.

Page 4

4

5. 

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. 

6. 

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 assessments 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. 

7. 

Petitioner asks the Tribunal to grant it preference by

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

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

Entire Tribunal Case Information Sheet - Respondent

MTT DOCKET NO. 26-000958

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact Information

Filer Type: 

Local Unit of Government

Local Unit of Government

City Of Southfield (OAKLAND)

First Name

M.I.

Last Name

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

City or Town

State

ZIP Code

Telephone 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

Laura

M.I.

Last Name

Hallahan

Firm Name (if any)

Hallahan & Associates PC

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

1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202

City or Town

Bloomfield Hills

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48302

Telephone Number

248-731-3089

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

mtt@hallahanlaw.com

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

Respondent or Authorized Attorney/Representative’s Signature: 

/s/Kelsea M. Melcher

/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

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Denso International America Inc, 

Petitioner, 

\4 

MTT Docket No. 

p. b 

j 00095 

5 

Parcel No. 76-24-20-326-228 

City of Southfield, 

Respondent. 

Jackie J. Cook (P68781) 

Honigman LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

2290 First National Building 

660 Woodward Avenue 

Detroit, MI 48226-3506 

(313) 465-7270 

jcook@honigman.com 

Proof of Service 

Lisa Joseph states that on 

< 

/ </. 2 2 , she did serve a copy of Petitioner's Petition, 

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

Dated: S [1S [2¢ 

% 

Foun Pruph 

Lisa Joseph 

v 

75146418.1.220879.396181

Page 2

BY CERTIFIED UNITED STATES MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED: 

CLERK 

SOUTHFIELD 

26000 EVERGREEN ROAD 

SOUTHFIELD, MI 48076 

ASSESSOR 

SOUTHFIELD 

26000 EVERGREEN ROAD 

SOUTHFIELD, MI 48076 

AND BY FIRST-CLASS UNITED STATES MAIL: 

CLERK 

OAKLAND COUNTY 

1200 N. TELEGRAPH ROAD 

PONTIAC, MI 48341-0413 

DIRECTOR OF EQUALIZATION 

OAKLAND COUNTY 

1200 N. TELEGRAPH ROAD 

PONTIAC, MI 48341-0413 

SECRETARY OF SCHOOL BOARD 

SOUTHFIELD PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

24661 LAHSER ROAD 

SOUTHFIELD, MI 48033-3238 

STATE TREASURER 

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY 

TREASURY BUILDING 

430 W. ALLEGAN ST. 

LANSING, MI 48922 

25-0088 

75146418.1.220879.396181

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

1 of 1

Docket #: 26-000958

Party Filing Document

Party Filing Document: 

 Petitioner

 Petitioner

 

 

If 'other', Identify: 

File

Document Type: 

 

 

fuFile:

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

25-0029 

75146418.1.220879.396181 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Denso International America Inc, 

Petitioner, 

v 

City of Southfield, 

Respondent. 

MTT Docket No. 

Parcel No. 76-24-20-326-228 

Jackie J. Cook (P68781) 

Honigman LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

2290 First National Building 

660 Woodward Avenue 

Detroit, MI 48226-3506 

(313) 465-7270 

jcook@honigman.com

Petition 

Denso International America Inc., (“Denso” or “Petitioner”), through its attorneys, 

Honigman LLP, says: 

1.

Denso’s principal office and place of business is located at 24777 Denso Drive, 

Southfield, MI 48033. 

2.

The subject real property, parcel no. 76-24-20-326-228, is located at 24777 Denso 

Drive, Southfield, MI 48033 in Oakland County (“Petitioner’s Property”). 

3.

Respondent, City of Southfield, assesses and collects property taxes on Petitioner's 

Property.

Page 2

2 

75146418.1.220879.396181 

4.

In 2026, Respondent’s board of review determined the taxable value of Petitioner's 

Property to be $15,020,560 and assessed Petitioner's Property at $15,020,560, which will result in 

a state equalized value in the same amount based upon the tentative equalization factor. 

5.

Petitioner's Property is classified as commercial improved. 

6.

Petitioner's Property is presently used or available for use for commercial purposes. 

7.

Petitioner believes that Petitioner's Property was originally designed to be used for 

commercial purposes. 

8.

This matter involves issues relating to (a) valuation, (b) assessment, (c) taxable 

value, and (d) due process, equal protection, and uniformity. 

9.

At this time, Petitioner believes, as it relates to taxable value, that there is a dispute 

relative to the value of a loss. 

10.

No board of review protest was required for Petitioner’s Property. 

11.

The 2026 assessment – including the state equalized and taxable values – imposed 

on Petitioner's Property, the taxes to be levied and collected on Petitioner’s Property, and the mode 

of assessment adopted by Respondent are invalid, unlawful, and operate as a fraud on Petitioner, 

because they 

(a) 

Exceed amounts permitted by the Michigan Constitution and applicable 

statutes; 

(b) 

Are calculated at or derived from higher percentages of true cash value than 

permissible under the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes; 

(c) 

Are based on the application of wrong principles and an erroneous 

determination of the true cash value of that portion of Petitioner's Property that 

is taxable under Michigan law, if any; and

Page 3

3 

75146418.1.220879.396181 

(d) 

Discriminate against Petitioner and deny Petitioner its constitutional rights to 

uniformity, equal protection, and due process of law. 

WHEREFORE, Petitioner requests that the Tax Tribunal enter an Order: (i) reducing the 

2026 taxable value of Petitioner's Property from $15,020,560 to $10,000,000; (ii) reducing the 

2026 assessed value and state equalized value of Petitioner's Property from $15,020,560 to 

$10,000,000; (iii) requiring payment to Petitioner of the refunds attributable to such reductions, 

plus interest and costs; and (iv) awarding Petitioner any other relief to which it is entitled. 

Dated: May 14, 2026

Respectfully submitted, 

Honigman LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

By:

Jackie J. Cook (P68781) 

2290 First National Building 

660 Woodward Avenue 

Detroit, MI 48226-3506 

(313) 465-7270 

jcook@honigman.com

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

Entire Tribunal Case Information Sheet - Petitioner

MTT DOCKET NO. 

 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information

Filer type: 

Organization 

Local Unit of Government

First Name

M.I.

Last Name/Company Name

Denso International America Inc

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

24777 Denso Drive

City or Town

Southfield

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48033

Telephone Number

3134657270

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

jcook@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

(313) 465-7420

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

jcook@honigman.com

 

Section 3: Issue 

Please designate one: 

Valuation 

 

Section 4: Subject Property Information 

How many parcels are you 

appealing?

1

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

24777 Denso Drive

Southfield

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

Michigan

48033

Taxing Authority (City or Township)

City Of Southfield (OAKLAND) 

County

Oakland

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.)

N/A

 

 

Section 5: Check which of the following you are appealing (check all that apply) 

True Cash and Taxable Values

If “Other”, please explain:

 

 

Section 6: Valuation Information for Each Parcel under Appeal

Parcel Number:

76-24-20-326-228

Classification of Property: Real (check one)

Commercial (check one)

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

15020560

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

15020560

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

20000000

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

10000000

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

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.

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

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

Payment Information

Amount: 600

Success: True

Message: ""

Waiver Code:

Transaction Number: 26051485408598

Supporting Waiver Documents:

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.