Hassan Mahmoud, Petitioner V City Of Dearborn, Respondent

Page 1

RECEIVED 

JAN 0% 2026 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIB 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

UNAL 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON |. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Huson 

Malou 

, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner(s) 

v 

MTT Docket No._3%- 008 

Ci oF Dearbom 

Respondent(s) 

MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT 

1. 

A default was entered against me on 

___10/07/3$ 

and, 

if applicable, the default 

was extended on ___ | [06/29 

2. 

Good cause exists to set aside the default because: 

— Did mv SRNL 

he evnlis 

equesany dotomentd 

os well 

08 

Other vod) 

The Oil wer 

+o spam 

fodder, 

3. 

I ask this Tribunal to set aside the default. 

Pogson Munrod 

Party/Representative (sign here) 

2G 

[Print/type mame of person signing] 

| certify that on this date 

| served a copy of this Motion, and any additional documentation, on the 

opposing party or their representative.

Page 2

Nom. 

Hossan Muawoud 

METROPLEX MI 480 

2 pl 

529 Calvoun Sk. 

= 

“Dew oin 

MA IPRS 

Ah 

30 DEC 2025 

PM7 

L 

To 

MOnigan Tax bona) 

GFW. OTTAWA 

SE. 

Lansing) M1 

uR43< 

AEHIF-10T0LL 

dugg 

bagg gly ej 

iadsgf [yf fescbe jail fodity

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 

Hassan Mahmoud, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003117 

 

City of Dearborn, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT 

 

On December 30, 2025, Petitioner filed a motion requesting the Tribunal set aside the 

default entered in this case on October 7, 2025. 

 

Respondent has not filed a response to the motion. 

 

The Tribunal has considered the motion and the case file and finds that Petitioner was 

held in default for failing to file a copy of the poverty exemption denial being appealed. 

Petitioner failed to respond and the Tribunal entered an order extending the time to cure 

on November 6, 2025. After Petitioner again failed to respond and the Tribunal 

dismissed this case on December 3, 2025. Petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration 

of the dismissal of the case, and the Tribunal denied it on December 18, 2025. 

 

Having now filed a Motion to Set Aside Default, Petitioner seemingly requests that the 

Tribunal reinstate this case. However, this case is closed and Petitioner failed to show 

that a palpable error occurred in the dismissal that would justify the denial of Petitioner’s 

Motion for Reconsideration. The Tribunal did not err in the dismissal of this case or the 

denial of Petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration. Given that this case is closed, the 

Tribunal finds that denial of Petitioner’s Motion to Set Aside Default is appropriate. 

Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion to Set Aside Default is DENIED. 

 

 

Entered: January 6, 2026 

 

 

By _____________________________ 

sw/sb 

 

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 

JAN 0% 2026 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIB 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

UNAL 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON |. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Huson 

Malou 

, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner(s) 

v 

MTT Docket No._3%- 008 

Ci oF Dearbom 

Respondent(s) 

MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT 

1. 

A default was entered against me on 

___10/07/3$ 

and, 

if applicable, the default 

was extended on ___ | [06/29 

2. 

Good cause exists to set aside the default because: 

— Did mv SRNL 

he evnlis 

equesany dotomentd 

os well 

08 

Other vod) 

The Oil wer 

+o spam 

fodder, 

3. 

I ask this Tribunal to set aside the default. 

Pogson Munrod 

Party/Representative (sign here) 

2G 

[Print/type mame of person signing] 

| certify that on this date 

| served a copy of this Motion, and any additional documentation, on the 

opposing party or their representative.

Page 2

Nom. 

Hossan Muawoud 

METROPLEX MI 480 

2 pl 

529 Calvoun Sk. 

= 

“Dew oin 

MA IPRS 

Ah 

30 DEC 2025 

PM7 

L 

To 

MOnigan Tax bona) 

GFW. OTTAWA 

SE. 

Lansing) M1 

uR43< 

AEHIF-10T0LL 

dugg 

bagg gly ej 

iadsgf [yf fescbe jail fodity

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 1 0 2025 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON |. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

aksewn 

 Malwoxd 

, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner(s) 

v 

MTT Docket No._%~ 0081 

City 

ob Deon 

9" 

Respondent(s) 

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

1. 

| wish this Tribunal to reconsider 

Poser vy dex Gpea 

peyton 

fom 

- 

2. 

Good cause exists to grant reconsideration because: 

~ Did OF YEN 

fhe eNilS 

YEUeRIny docmentd 

0s uel) OF Die OAR) 

The C0IS were 

Yo spam 

folder, 

3. 

[ask this Tribunal to grant my request for reconsideration. 

Hasson Manmosd 

Party/Representative (sign here) 

PERG TAS 

[Print/&ype narhe of person signing} 

[ certify that on this date 

| served a copy of this Motion, and any additional documentation, on the 

opposing party or their representative. 

ol 03) 35 

Pr.

Page 2

& 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Hassan Mahmoud, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner, 

i 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

v 

MTT Docket No. 25-003117 

City of Dearborn, 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

Patricia L. Halm 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

The Tribunal has considered the file in this case and finds that Petitioner was placed in 

default on October 7, 2025, because Petitioner failed to include a copy of the notice 

giving rise to the appeal, i.e., poverty exemption denial notice. On November 8, 2025, 

the Tribunal extended the time for Petitioner to cure the default by an additional 14 

days, and they have failed to respond. Petitioner has not complied with either order, 

and the latter stated that “failure to comply with this Order may result in the dismissal of 

the case 

. 

. 

.” and referenced Grimm v Dep't of Treasury." 

In Grimm, the Michigan 

Court of Appeals summarized factors that the Tribunal should consider before imposing 

the sanction of dismissal. Those factors are: 

(1) whether the violation was wilful or accidental; (2) the party's history of 

refusing to comply with previous court orders; 

(3) the prejudice 

to the 

opposing party; (4) whether there exists a history of deliberate delay; (5) the 

degree of compliance with other parts of the court's orders; (6) attempts to 

cure the defect; and (7) whether a lesser sanction would better serve the 

interests of justice. 

Here, Petitioner's failure to comply with multiple orders has established a history of 

deliberate delay. As a result, giving careful consideration to the factors involved and 

considering all options in determining what sanction is just and proper, the Tribunal 

finds that dismissal is appropriate, and a lesser sanction would not be appropriate in 

light of Petitioner's history of noncompliance in this case. 

Therefore, 

IT 1S ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED.

Page 3

MTT Docket No. 25-003117 

Page 2 of 2 

APPEAL RIGHTS 

If you disagree with the final decision in this case, you may file a motion for 

reconsideration with the Tribunal or a claim of appeal with the Michigan Court of 

Appeals. 

A motion for reconsideration must be filed with the Tribunal with the required filing fee 

within 21 days from the date of entry of the final decision. Because the final decision 

closes the case, the motion cannot be filed through the Tribunal's web-based e-filing 

system; it must be filed by mail or personal service. The fee for the filing of such 

motions is $50.00 in the Entire Tribunal and $25.00 in the Small Claims Division, unless 

the Small Claims decision relates to the valuation of property and the property had a 

principal residence exemption of at least 50% at the time the petition was filed or the 

decision relates to the grant or denial of a poverty or disabled veterans exemption and, 

if so, there is no filing fee. You are required to serve a copy of the motion on the 

opposing party by mail or personal service or by email if the opposing party agrees to 

electronic service, and proof demonstrating that service must be submitted with the 

motion. Responses to motions for reconsideration are prohibited and there are no oral 

arguments unless otherwise ordered by the Tribunal. 

Alternatively, you may file a claim of appeal with the Michigan Court of Appeals. 

If the 

claim is filed within 21 days of the entry of the final decision, it is an “appeal of right.” 

If 

the claim is filed more than 21 days after the entry of the final decision, it is an “appeal 

by leave.” A copy of the claim of appeal must be filed with the Tribunal to certify the 

record on appeal. There is no certification fee. 

Entered: December 3, 2025 

By 

_aliicos 

oo ita 

kac 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

| 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 4

015 

JULY

Page 5

DE

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 

Hassan Mahmoud, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003117 

 

City of Dearborn, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Marcus L. Abood 

 

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

 

On December 5, 2025, Petitioner filed a motion requesting that the Tribunal reconsider 

the Order of Dismissal (order) entered in this case on December 3, 2025. In the motion, 

Petitioner states that the order was the first indication of an issue with the docket 

because the prior emails went to a spam email folder. 

 

The Tribunal has considered the motion and the case file and finds that Petitioner’s 

motion demonstrates the basis why Petitioner failed to respond to the Tribunal default 

orders issued October 7 and November 6, 2025. Petitioner timely responded to the 

order and included the notice giving rise to the appeal. However, Petitioner did not 

include the motion and proof of service required by the November 6, 2025 order, and as 

a result, Petitioner has not fully cured the default. 

 

Given the above, Petitioner has failed to demonstrate a palpable error relative to the 

order that misled the Tribunal and the parties and that would have resulted in a different 

disposition if the error was corrected.1 Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED. 

 

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

 

APPEAL RIGHTS 

 

If you disagree with the final decision in this case, you may file a claim of appeal with 

the Michigan Court of Appeals. If the claim is filed within 21 days of the entry of the final 

decision, it is an “appeal of right.” If the claim is filed more than 21 days after the entry 

of the final decision, it is an “appeal by leave.” A copy of the claim of appeal must be 

filed with the Tribunal to certify the record on appeal. There is no certification fee. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By

 

Entered: December 18, 2025 

bw 

 

1 See MCR 2.119(F)(3). A palpable error is one that is “easily perceptible, plain, obvious, readily visible, 

noticeable, patent, distinct, or manifest.” Luckow v Luckow, 291 Mich App 417, 426 (2011) (quotation 

marks and citation omitted).

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003117 

Page 2 of 2 

 

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 1 0 2025 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON |. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

aksewn 

 Malwoxd 

, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner(s) 

v 

MTT Docket No._%~ 0081 

City 

ob Deon 

9" 

Respondent(s) 

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

1. 

| wish this Tribunal to reconsider 

Poser vy dex Gpea 

peyton 

fom 

- 

2. 

Good cause exists to grant reconsideration because: 

~ Did OF YEN 

fhe eNilS 

YEUeRIny docmentd 

0s uel) OF Die OAR) 

The C0IS were 

Yo spam 

folder, 

3. 

[ask this Tribunal to grant my request for reconsideration. 

Hasson Manmosd 

Party/Representative (sign here) 

PERG TAS 

[Print/&ype narhe of person signing} 

[ certify that on this date 

| served a copy of this Motion, and any additional documentation, on the 

opposing party or their representative. 

ol 03) 35 

Pr.

Page 2

& 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Hassan Mahmoud, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner, 

i 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

v 

MTT Docket No. 25-003117 

City of Dearborn, 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

Patricia L. Halm 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

The Tribunal has considered the file in this case and finds that Petitioner was placed in 

default on October 7, 2025, because Petitioner failed to include a copy of the notice 

giving rise to the appeal, i.e., poverty exemption denial notice. On November 8, 2025, 

the Tribunal extended the time for Petitioner to cure the default by an additional 14 

days, and they have failed to respond. Petitioner has not complied with either order, 

and the latter stated that “failure to comply with this Order may result in the dismissal of 

the case 

. 

. 

.” and referenced Grimm v Dep't of Treasury." 

In Grimm, the Michigan 

Court of Appeals summarized factors that the Tribunal should consider before imposing 

the sanction of dismissal. Those factors are: 

(1) whether the violation was wilful or accidental; (2) the party's history of 

refusing to comply with previous court orders; 

(3) the prejudice 

to the 

opposing party; (4) whether there exists a history of deliberate delay; (5) the 

degree of compliance with other parts of the court's orders; (6) attempts to 

cure the defect; and (7) whether a lesser sanction would better serve the 

interests of justice. 

Here, Petitioner's failure to comply with multiple orders has established a history of 

deliberate delay. As a result, giving careful consideration to the factors involved and 

considering all options in determining what sanction is just and proper, the Tribunal 

finds that dismissal is appropriate, and a lesser sanction would not be appropriate in 

light of Petitioner's history of noncompliance in this case. 

Therefore, 

IT 1S ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED.

Page 3

MTT Docket No. 25-003117 

Page 2 of 2 

APPEAL RIGHTS 

If you disagree with the final decision in this case, you may file a motion for 

reconsideration with the Tribunal or a claim of appeal with the Michigan Court of 

Appeals. 

A motion for reconsideration must be filed with the Tribunal with the required filing fee 

within 21 days from the date of entry of the final decision. Because the final decision 

closes the case, the motion cannot be filed through the Tribunal's web-based e-filing 

system; it must be filed by mail or personal service. The fee for the filing of such 

motions is $50.00 in the Entire Tribunal and $25.00 in the Small Claims Division, unless 

the Small Claims decision relates to the valuation of property and the property had a 

principal residence exemption of at least 50% at the time the petition was filed or the 

decision relates to the grant or denial of a poverty or disabled veterans exemption and, 

if so, there is no filing fee. You are required to serve a copy of the motion on the 

opposing party by mail or personal service or by email if the opposing party agrees to 

electronic service, and proof demonstrating that service must be submitted with the 

motion. Responses to motions for reconsideration are prohibited and there are no oral 

arguments unless otherwise ordered by the Tribunal. 

Alternatively, you may file a claim of appeal with the Michigan Court of Appeals. 

If the 

claim is filed within 21 days of the entry of the final decision, it is an “appeal of right.” 

If 

the claim is filed more than 21 days after the entry of the final decision, it is an “appeal 

by leave.” A copy of the claim of appeal must be filed with the Tribunal to certify the 

record on appeal. There is no certification fee. 

Entered: December 3, 2025 

By 

_aliicos 

oo ita 

kac 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

| 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 4

015 

JULY

Page 5

DE

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 

Hassan Mahmoud, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003117 

 

City of Dearborn, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

 

The Tribunal has considered the file in this case and finds that Petitioner was placed in 

default on October 7, 2025, because Petitioner failed to include a copy of the notice 

giving rise to the appeal, i.e., poverty exemption denial notice. On November 6, 2025, 

the Tribunal extended the time for Petitioner to cure the default by an additional 14 

days, and they have failed to respond. Petitioner has not complied with either order, 

and the latter stated that “failure to comply with this Order may result in the dismissal of 

the case . . .” and referenced Grimm v Dep’t of Treasury.1 In Grimm, the Michigan 

Court of Appeals summarized factors that the Tribunal should consider before imposing 

the sanction of dismissal. Those factors are: 

 

(1) whether the violation was wilful or accidental; (2) the party's history of 

refusing to comply with previous court orders; (3) the prejudice to the 

opposing party; (4) whether there exists a history of deliberate delay; (5) the 

degree of compliance with other parts of the court's orders; (6) attempts to 

cure the defect; and (7) whether a lesser sanction would better serve the 

interests of justice.2 

 

Here, Petitioner’s failure to comply with multiple orders has established a history of 

deliberate delay. As a result, giving careful consideration to the factors involved and 

considering all options in determining what sanction is just and proper, the Tribunal 

finds that dismissal is appropriate, and a lesser sanction would not be appropriate in 

light of Petitioner’s history of noncompliance in this case. 

 

Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED. 

 

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

 

 

1 Grimm v Dep’t of Treasury, 291 Mich App 140 (2010). 

2 Id. at 149.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003117 

Page 2 of 2 

 

APPEAL RIGHTS 

If you disagree with the final decision in this case, you may file a motion for 

reconsideration with the Tribunal or a claim of appeal with the Michigan Court of 

Appeals. 

 

A motion for reconsideration must be filed with the Tribunal with the required filing fee 

within 21 days from the date of entry of the final decision. Because the final decision 

closes the case, the motion cannot be filed through the Tribunal’s web-based e-filing 

system; it must be filed by mail or personal service. The fee for the filing of such 

motions is $50.00 in the Entire Tribunal and $25.00 in the Small Claims Division, unless 

the Small Claims decision relates to the valuation of property and the property had a 

principal residence exemption of at least 50% at the time the petition was filed or the 

decision relates to the grant or denial of a poverty or disabled veterans exemption and, 

if so, there is no filing fee. You are required to serve a copy of the motion on the 

opposing party by mail or personal service or by email if the opposing party agrees to 

electronic service, and proof demonstrating that service must be submitted with the 

motion. Responses to motions for reconsideration are prohibited and there are no oral 

arguments unless otherwise ordered by the Tribunal. 

 

Alternatively, you may file a claim of appeal with the Michigan Court of Appeals. If the 

claim is filed within 21 days of the entry of the final decision, it is an “appeal of right.” If 

the claim is filed more than 21 days after the entry of the final decision, it is an “appeal 

by leave.” A copy of the claim of appeal must be filed with the Tribunal to certify the 

record on appeal. There is no certification fee. 

 

 

Entered: December 3, 2025 

 

 

By _____________________________ 

kac 

 

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

 

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 

Hassan Mahmoud, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003117 

 

City of Dearborn, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR PETITIONER TO CURE DEFAULT 

 

The Tribunal has considered the file in this case and finds that it entered an order 

holding Petitioner in default on October 7, 2025, because Petitioner failed to file a copy 

of the notice giving rise to the appeal, i.e. poverty exemption denial notice.1 Petitioner 

was required to cure the default within 14 days. In order to properly invoke the 

Tribunal’s jurisdiction, Petitioner must obtain a copy of the notice from Respondent and 

then submit a copy of that notice to the Tribunal. Petitioner has had ample time to 

comply, yet has failed to respond or submit the required filings. Though the Tribunal 

finds an extension of time to cure the default appropriate, Petitioner’s failure to comply 

with Tribunal orders and its Rules of Practice and Procedure has established a history 

of deliberate delay that would justify dismissal of the case for failure to timely comply 

with this order.2 Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that the time for Petitioner to cure the default is EXTENDED. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner must complete the following to cure the 

default: (1) file a copy of the poverty exemption denial notice, (2) file a Motion to Set 

Aside Default, and (3) file proof the motion was served on Respondent. The foregoing 

must be filed with the Tribunal within 14 days of the entry of this order.3 

 

1 The order further stated, “Failure to comply with this order will result in the defaulted party being 

required to file a motion to set aside the default (with appropriate filing fee).” 

2 See Grimm v Dep’t of Treasury, 291 Mich App 140 (2010). 

3 “A submission by mail is considered filed on the date indicated by the United States Postal Service 

postmark on the envelope containing the submission. A submission without a postmark or with an illegible 

postmark is considered filed on the date the submission is received by the tribunal. A submission by 

commercial delivery service is considered filed on the date the submission is given to the commercial 

service for delivery to the tribunal as indicated by the receipt date on the package containing the 

submission. A submission by personal service is considered filed on the date the submission is received. 

A submission through the tribunal’s e-filing system by 11:59 p.m. on a business day is considered filed on 

that business day. A submission by email to the email address designated by the tribunal by 11:59 p.m. 

on a business day is considered filed on that business day. A submission on a Saturday, a Sunday, or a 

holiday is considered filed on the following business day, as provided by section 35a of the tax tribunal 

act, MCL 205.735a.” TTR 225(5).

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003117 

Page 2 of 2 

 

Failure to comply with this order may result in the dismissal of the case as provided by 

TTR 237.4 

 

 

Entered: November 6, 2025 

 

 

By _____________________________ 

kac 

 

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 

 

 

 

 

4 See also MCL 205.732.

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

Hassan Mahmoud,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003117

City Of Dearborn,

Respondent.

ORDER OF DEFAULT

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

Petitioner did not submit a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal (i.e., notice of 

action taken by Board of Review, uncapping notice, PRE denial notice, final assessment 

notice, etc.), as required by TTR 279. As such, Petitioner must submit the notice within 

14 days of the entry of this order. 

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner is HELD IN DEFAULT.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defaulted party shall cure the default, as indicated 

above, within 14 days of the entry of this order.i 

Failure to comply with this order will result in the defaulted party being required to file a 

motion to set aside the default (with appropriate filing fee).

By:_______________________________

Entered: October 7, 2025

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

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

i “A submission by mail is considered filed on the date indicated by the United States Postal Service 

postmark on the envelope containing the submission. A submission without a postmark or with an illegible 

postmark is considered filed on the date the submission is received by the tribunal. A submission by 

commercial delivery service is considered filed on the date the submission is given to the commercial 

service for delivery to the tribunal as indicated by the receipt date on the package containing the 

submission. A submission by personal service is considered filed on the date the submission is received.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003117

Page 2 of 4

A submission through the tribunal’s e-filing system by 11:59 p.m. on a business day is considered filed on 

that business day. A submission by email to the email address designated by the tribunal by 11:59 p.m. 

on a business day is considered filed on that business day. A submission on a Saturday, a Sunday, or a 

holiday is considered filed on the following business day, as provided by section 35a of the tax tribunal 

act, MCL 205.735a.” TTR 225(5)

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

Hassan Mahmoud,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003117

City Of Dearborn,

Respondent.

ORDER OF DEFAULT

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

Petitioner did not submit a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal (i.e., notice of 

action taken by Board of Review, uncapping notice, PRE denial notice, final assessment 

notice, etc.), as required by TTR 279. As such, Petitioner must submit the notice within 

14 days of the entry of this order. 

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner is HELD IN DEFAULT.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defaulted party shall cure the default, as indicated 

above, within 14 days of the entry of this order.ii 

Failure to comply with this order will result in the defaulted party being required to file a 

motion to set aside the default (with appropriate filing fee).

By:_______________________________

Entered: October 7, 2025

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

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

ii “A submission by mail is considered filed on the date indicated by the United States Postal Service 

postmark on the envelope containing the submission. A submission without a postmark or with an illegible 

postmark is considered filed on the date the submission is received by the tribunal. A submission by 

commercial delivery service is considered filed on the date the submission is given to the commercial

Page 4

MTT Docket No. 25-003117

Page 4 of 4

service for delivery to the tribunal as indicated by the receipt date on the package containing the 

submission. A submission by personal service is considered filed on the date the submission is received. 

A submission through

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

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL PETITION FORM

VALUATION / EXEMPTION / CLASSIFICATION APPEAL

MOAHR DOCKET NO. 

Do not use this form to appeal Principal Residence Exemption, Qualified Agricultural Exemption, Special Assessment, or Non-Property tax 

disputes.

Pursuant to Michigan Tax Tribunal Rule (TTR) 277(3), you MUST submit a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal (e.g. Board of Review 

Decision or Notice of Uncapping) with this Small Claims Petition, if applicable. If you do not submit this document, you may be held in default.

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information

Filer Type: Individual 

First Name

Hassan

M.I.

Last Name/Company Name

Mahmoud

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

5819 Calhoun

City or Town

Dearborn

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48126

Telephone Number

313-638-0786

Fax Number

E-mail Address

halamahmoud1101@gmail.com

Section 2: Petitioner’s Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information

First Name

M.I.

Last Name

Firm Name (if any)

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

City or Town

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

Telephone Number

Fax Number

E-mail Address 

Section 3: Subject Property Information

How many parcels are you appealing?

1

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.

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

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

Michigan

Taxing Authority (City or Township)

City Of Dearborn (WAYNE)

County 

Wayne

Section 4: Issues Being Appealed (check all that apply)

Poverty Exemption

 

Section 5: Explain the Reason for this Appeal

We didn't have the principal resident exemption filed. I believe it was removed by mistake in the past. It is now filed.

Section 6: Jurisdictional Issues

Year(s) you are appealing:

2025

Did you protest the assessment at a Board of Review (BOR)? 

If Yes, check which BOR you attended AND upload the BOR decision: 

If No, check the applicable reason(s):

Did you request a Poverty Exemption at the BOR? No

If Yes, check which BOR considered your application AND upload the BOR decision: 

 March  July  December

If No, explain why:

I didnt know I had to 

Section 7: Valuation Information *Use the multiple parcel form for additional, contiguous parcels.

Parcel Identification Number: 

Classification of Property:

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

Current Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value) as established by the BOR:

Current Taxable Value as established by the BOR:

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

 

Multiply the True Cash Value by .5 and enter here. This is your contention of Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value).

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

Section 8: Classification Information *Only the MI Dep’t of Treasury may appeal this issue to the Tribunal*

Parcel Identification Number:

 

Current Classification of Property as established by Board of Review:

What do you believe is the property’s classification?

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

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

Fee Information

Does the subject property have a Principal Residence Exemption of at least 50% as of the date of the filing of this petition?

Are you appealing ONLY the denial of a Poverty Exemption?

Yes

If you answered yes to either or both of these questions, you are not required to pay any filing fees.

The filing fee is based on the greater of the 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, not to exceed a total filing fee of $1,000.

If your property is residential property (see MCL 205.762) and

the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention is: Filing Fee is:

$100,000.00 and under $125.00

$100,000.01 to $500,000.00 $200.00

$Over $500,000.00 $300.00

If your property is NOT residential property (see MCL 205.762) and

the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention is: Filing Fee is:

$100,000.00 and under $250.00

* Plus $25.00 for each additional parcel, as indicated above.

If your property is NOT residential property and the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention is $100,000.01 or greater the appeal does not qualify for 

Small Claims. Therefore, an Entire Tribunal petition must be filed.

Page 4

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN

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

Hassan Mahmoud,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 25-003117

City Of Dearborn,

Respondent.

NOTICE OF DOCKET NUMBER

TAKE NOTICE that a Small Claims petition has been filed and the above-noted docket 

number has been assigned to that petition. The assignment of the docket number does 

not mean that the Tribunal has authority over the petition or that the petition complies 

with the Tribunal’s rules. The docket number needs to be included on all documents 

submitted in this case.

Respondent shall file an answer to the petition within 28 days of the issuance of a 

copy of this Notice to Respondent. Tribunal answer forms are available on our 

website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib. Respondents must utilize the appropriate answer 

form. Failure to file the answer within the 28-day time frame may result in the 

placement of Respondent in default, as provided by TTR 281. Further, an electronic 

copy of the petition can be reviewed by utilizing the Docket Lookup Search on the 

Tribunal’s website.

By: __Tribunal Clerk_____

Entered: October 7, 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

Hassan Mahmoud,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 25-003117

City Of Dearborn,

Respondent.

NOTICE OF DOCKET NUMBER

TAKE NOTICE that a Small Claims petition has been filed and the above-noted docket 

number has been assigned to that petition. The assignment of the docket number does 

not mean that the Tribunal has authority over the petition or that the petition complies 

with the Tribunal’s rules. The docket number needs to be included on all documents 

submitted in this case.

Respondent shall file an answer to the petition within 28 days of the issuance of a 

copy of this Notice to Respondent. Tribunal answer forms are available on our 

website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib. Respondents must utilize the appropriate answer 

form. Failure to file the answer within the 28-day time frame may result in the 

placement of Respondent in default, as provided by TTR 281. Further, an electronic 

copy of the petition can be reviewed by utilizing the Docket Lookup Search on the 

Tribunal’s website.

By: __Tribunal Clerk_____

Entered: October 7, 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

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL PETITION FORM

VALUATION / EXEMPTION / CLASSIFICATION APPEAL

MOAHR DOCKET NO. 

Do not use this form to appeal Principal Residence Exemption, Qualified Agricultural Exemption, Special Assessment, or Non-Property tax 

disputes.

Pursuant to Michigan Tax Tribunal Rule (TTR) 277(3), you MUST submit a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal (e.g. Board of Review 

Decision or Notice of Uncapping) with this Small Claims Petition, if applicable. If you do not submit this document, you may be held in default.

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information

Filer Type: Individual 

First Name

Hassan

M.I.

Last Name/Company Name

Mahmoud

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

5819 Calhoun

City or Town

Dearborn

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48126

Telephone Number

313-638-0786

Fax Number

E-mail Address

halamahmoud1101@gmail.com

Section 2: Petitioner’s Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information

First Name

M.I.

Last Name

Firm Name (if any)

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

City or Town

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

Telephone Number

Fax Number

E-mail Address 

Section 3: Subject Property Information

How many parcels are you appealing?

1

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.

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

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

Michigan

Taxing Authority (City or Township)

City Of Dearborn (WAYNE)

County 

Wayne

Section 4: Issues Being Appealed (check all that apply)

Poverty Exemption

 

Section 5: Explain the Reason for this Appeal

We didn't have the principal resident exemption filed. I believe it was removed by mistake in the past. It is now filed.

Section 6: Jurisdictional Issues

Year(s) you are appealing:

2025

Did you protest the assessment at a Board of Review (BOR)? 

If Yes, check which BOR you attended AND upload the BOR decision: 

If No, check the applicable reason(s):

Did you request a Poverty Exemption at the BOR? No

If Yes, check which BOR considered your application AND upload the BOR decision: 

 March  July  December

If No, explain why:

I didnt know I had to 

Section 7: Valuation Information *Use the multiple parcel form for additional, contiguous parcels.

Parcel Identification Number: 

Classification of Property:

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

Current Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value) as established by the BOR:

Current Taxable Value as established by the BOR:

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

 

Multiply the True Cash Value by .5 and enter here. This is your contention of Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value).

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

Section 8: Classification Information *Only the MI Dep’t of Treasury may appeal this issue to the Tribunal*

Parcel Identification Number:

 

Current Classification of Property as established by Board of Review:

What do you believe is the property’s classification?

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

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

Fee Information

Does the subject property have a Principal Residence Exemption of at least 50% as of the date of the filing of this petition?

Are you appealing ONLY the denial of a Poverty Exemption?

Yes

If you answered yes to either or both of these questions, you are not required to pay any filing fees.

The filing fee is based on the greater of the 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, not to exceed a total filing fee of $1,000.

If your property is residential property (see MCL 205.762) and

the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention is: Filing Fee is:

$100,000.00 and under $125.00

$100,000.01 to $500,000.00 $200.00

$Over $500,000.00 $300.00

If your property is NOT residential property (see MCL 205.762) and

the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention is: Filing Fee is:

$100,000.00 and under $250.00

* Plus $25.00 for each additional parcel, as indicated above.

If your property is NOT residential property and the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention is $100,000.01 or greater the appeal does not qualify for 

Small Claims. Therefore, an Entire Tribunal petition must be filed.

Page 4

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN

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.