Michigan

James P Hill, Petitioner V Township Of Hayes, Respondent

Petitioner: James P Hill
Respondent: Township Of Hayes

Case overview

Docket number: 25-003642-TT
Status: Disposed
CaseType: SC Property
Division: Small Claims Division
County: Clare
Judge: No judge assigned

Docket history

Line #	Subject	Filer	Line Ref	Enter Date/Post Mark	Fee	Related Item
10	Order of Dismissal	Not recorded	Not recorded	02/13/2026	Not recorded	Download
9	Notice of Filing	Not recorded	Not recorded	02/12/2026	Not recorded	Download
8	Response to Order - Answer	RESP	Not recorded	01/23/2026	Not recorded	Download
7	Order of Partial Dismissal	Not recorded	Not recorded	01/21/2026	Not recorded	Download
6	Order Holding Respondent in Default	Not recorded	Not recorded	01/21/2026	Not recorded	Download
5	Order Extending P's Default	Not recorded	4	01/21/2026	Not recorded	Download
4	Order of Default of Petitioner	Not recorded	Not recorded	10/22/2025	Not recorded	Download
3	Petition has been verified	PET	1	10/22/2025	Not recorded	Download
2	Notice of Docket Number SC	Not recorded	Not recorded	10/22/2025	Not recorded	Download
1	A petition was received.	PET	Not recorded	08/15/2025	$0.00	Download

Documents

25-003642.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

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

James P Hill,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

Petitioner,

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

MTT Docket No. 25-003642

Hayes Township,

Presiding Judge

Respondent.

Patricia L. Halm

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

On January 23, 2026, Respondent filed an answer in response to the order holding

Respondent in default issued on January 21, 2026.

The Tribunal has reviewed the file and the case and finds that Respondent was held in

default because they failed to file an answer. Although Respondent timely responded to

the Order of Default, their attempt to cure the default was incomplete as Respondent

filed the wrong answer form for the issue under appeal. Respondent filed an Answer for

Valuation Appeal when the proper answer form was the Answer for Poverty Exemption

Appeal.

Moreover, the Tribunal finds that Petitioner was placed in default on October 22, 2025,

because Petitioner failed to file a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal, i.e. notice

denying Petitioner’s request for a poverty exemption. On January 21, 2026, 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

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

2 Id. at 149.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003642

Page 2 of 3

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.

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: February 13, 2026

By _____________________________

kac

Page 3

MTT Docket No. 25-003642 

Page 3 of 3 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

I certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent on the entry date indicated above to the 

parties or their attorneys or authorized representatives, if any, utilizing either the mailing 

or email addresses on file, as 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.

SC-Notice_of_Filing_of_Answer.2026-02-12_14-02-32.0000.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

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

James P Hill,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

MTT Docket No. 25-003642

Township Of Hayes,

Respondent.

NOTICE OF FILING

TAKE NOTICE that a Small Claims answer has been filed and the electronic copy of the

answer can be reviewed by utilizing the Docket Lookup on the Tribunal’s website.

Unless Respondent was defaulted, this case is ready to be scheduled for a Small

Claims hearing and will be scheduled in the normal course of scheduling. You will

receive a Notice of Hearing from the Tribunal by e-mail if you have identified an email

address in the petition or other documentation. The Notice of Hearing will inform you of

the date, time, and location of your hearing (note that your hearing will likely be

conducted by telephone). Please read the Notice of Hearing as it includes important

information.

EVIDENCE: Parties are required to submit all evidence to the Tribunal and send a copy

to the opposing party at least 21 days before the hearing date even if the documents

had been submitted to the local Board of Review or the Michigan Department of

Treasury. If the documents are not timely submitted to the Tribunal and served on the

opposing party, the documents may be excluded. Documents may be filed with the

Tribunal by mail or through the Tribunal’s e-filing system. Documents may be sent to the

opposing party by mail or by e-mail, if the parties agree to service by e-mail.

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

documents are public records and will appear for public viewing on the Tax

Docket Lookup. Users who file documents are responsible for ensuring sensitive or

personal identifying information is withheld or redacted. See TTR 209. If a user wishes

to file a document for consideration by the Michigan Tax 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.

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

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003642

Page 2 of 6

submitting a Request for Redactions. The Request for Redactions form will be

available on the Entire Tribunal and Small Claims pages of our website.

Alternate Dispute Resolution Options

INFORMAL SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE: Parties have the option of handling this

case through an informal settlement conference. An informal settlement conference

is a meeting between the parties and/or their representatives to discuss the issues in a

case in an effort to settle the case. This process may be an alternative to a hearing with

a judge and may result in the parties’ filing a Joint Stipulation for Entry of Consent

Judgment. Visit the Tribunal’s ADR webpage for more information.

NOTE: The parties may not request an informal settlement conference to discuss an

appeal of a principal residence exemption that was denied by either the Michigan

Department of Treasury or a County. Also, state taxes levied by the Michigan

Department of Treasury, such as income taxes, are not subject to the informal

settlement conference process.

MEDIATION: Parties have the option of handling this case through mediation.

Mediation is a voluntary process where a mediator facilitates communication between

the parties, assists in identifying issues, and helps explore solutions to promote a

mutually acceptable settlement. This process may be an alternative to a hearing with a

judge and may result in the parties’ filing a Joint Stipulation for Entry of Consent

Judgment. Visit the Tribunal’s ADR webpage for more information.

If you have any questions, please contact the Tribunal by phone at (517) 335-9760 or

email taxtrib@michigan.gov.

By: Tribunal Clerk

Entered: February 12, 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

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

James P Hill,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 25-003642

Township Of Hayes,

Respondent.

NOTICE OF FILING

TAKE NOTICE that a Small Claims answer has been filed and the electronic copy of the 

answer can be reviewed by utilizing the Docket Lookup on the Tribunal’s website. 

Unless Respondent was defaulted, this case is ready to be scheduled for a Small 

Claims hearing and will be scheduled in the normal course of scheduling. You will 

receive a Notice of Hearing from the Tribunal by e-mail if you have identified an email 

address in the petition or other documentation. The Notice of Hearing will inform you of 

the date, time, and location of your hearing (note that

Page 4

MTT

Page 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.

25-003642.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

RECEIVED 

BIE, 

AA 

JAN 27 2026 

= 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL ANSWER FORM 

VALUATION / UNCAPPING 

MTT DOCKET NO. 25-003642 

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact Information 

Unit of Government 

Hayes Township 

Mailing Address (Ne., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route): 

Po Box 310 

City or Town: 

State: 

ZIP Code: 

Harrison 

Ml 

148625 

Telephone Number: 989-5390-7 

1 28 

Email Address {do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via ematl): 

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

1 

First Name: 

M.A: 

Last Name: 

James 

L 

VanWormer 

Firm Name (if any): 

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

Po Box 310 

City or Town: 

State: 

ZIP Code: 

Harrison 

a 

a 

Telephione Number: 989-539-7 1 28 

Email Address (do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via email): 

hayestownshipassessor@Gmail.com 

Section 3: Subject Property Information 

Are the parcels listed by Petitioner contiguous or adjoining? 

ves 

[Ne 

Not Applicable 

if no, list all parcels that are adjoining in separate groupings. Attacha 

separate sheet if necessary. 

Does the subject property have a Principat Residence Exemption of 50% or more for all tax years at issue? 

Yes 

[mn] No

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA

GOVERNOR

LANSING

DIRECTOR

Section 4: Explain Your Answer to this Appeal

The petitioner has not appealed the valuation of the property nor applied for the poverty

exemption.

| did send the petitioner a poverty exemption application.

Section 5: Jurisdictional Issues

IF PETITIONER IS APPEALING THE TRUE CASH AND/OR TAXABLE VALUES

Did Petitioner protest the assessment at a Board of Review (BOR)? O Yes

If yes, check which BOR Petitioner attended: [| March

Od July

Oa December

If the July or December BOR revised the assessment(s) at issue, did it have authority? [Hl] Yes

O No

If yes, cite the Board's authority.

Was the assessment at issue established as the result of a clerical error or mutual mistake of fact? [] Yes

If yes, explain

Is Petitioner appealing from a State Tax Commission Order?

[J Yes

[Ano

If so, what is the issue date?

IF PETITIONER IS APPEALING THE UNCAPPING OF TAXABLE VALUE

When was the Notice of Uncapping, if applicable, issued?

Under what statutory section was the Taxable Value uncapped?

Section 6: Valuation Information use the multiple parcel form for additional, contiguous parcels.

Feet 18-007-120-072-10

Classification of Property:

Real

Personal (J (check one)

Agricultural

Commercial

Industrial

Residential

Timber-Cutover []

Developmental [J

Utility [J (check one)

Page 3

+xxDO91URTIENG 30U ING STARTS

000°%¥ 

00L’8¥ 

00€’¥S 

0896 ‘TE 

o8vs ge 

ozze se 

00T°LE 

1005°T¥ 

00S’S¥ 

006°9 

002°L 

008°8 

7207] 

£202 

vZ02 

QELOEASNI LTOZ/ET/CT 

AZ 

70 Ajunop 

©6007 

- 66

OETE‘9E 

005’€9 

000°1S 

005’21T 

S202 

eum 

uum 

oum 

EL 

TN 

eTqexel 

IIo 

/TRURATIL 

MBTADY 

70 pIeog 

anTeA 

SutpTIng 

anTeA 

puel 

lenTeA 

|[passessy 

E308 

uted pooTd 

PURTIOM 

auTA®RY 

JUOXTISIBM 

puog 

papoom 

dwemg 

padesspue 

ubTH 

MOTT 

BuTTIOd 

T1249 

8371S 

30 Audexbodol 

*sTTaN puncxbrspun 

SOTATTTIN PIEPULIS 

| 

S3UBTT 309338 

qany 

i 

ses 

/ 

_ p®

| 

OTI30TH 

Tomes 

| 

Tonos 

. 

YE TTOd 0T«06+9€ LT0Z/LT/E0 DSNSSI 

‘SE9TO-LTd7 ITWISd 203 UOTIATIDSQ AXoM 

zamag WIOAS 

NETTY 

| 

000°se 

_ snes pueT 

‘3S@ Te30l 

 S9IOY TRIOL Z6°0 

‘3993 IUOII TRAIDY 00T 

ood pons 

3 

74 LO

00521 

00T 

ZT 

 0000°T 0000°T 00°00T 00°C0T 

aa sens 

4 

a. ping 

005§°2T 

00T 

G2 

 0000°T 0000°T 00°00% 00°00T 

aa s€ns 

peoy 37%d 

| 

anTeA 

uosesy 

-Lpyg 238 

yideg 

auoxi 

uadsa 

Elil-hlicebs] 

uoTadraosag 

sjuswasozdul 

| 

» $I0308d 

x 

orTang 

QOOHYOSHOIAN 830% 

840F STQel PUu®T 103 S9JBUWTISH BNTRA puet 

| 

queses 

| 

posozdur| 

x 

£766 

1¥AL/ADL 0LO’'LZT ADL 3S SZ0T 

02T 

:# dn 

§66T/8T/0T 

$00T "E¥°d 

TYILINYE 

5€910-L1d2] 

LT0Z/LT/EQ 

SNIQTING HTOF 

STOOHDS ALINOWKOO NOSIWEVH :100USS 

T 

snjelg 

zaquIN 

@3eq 

(s)3TwIsd Butpring| 

) 

[-u 

:6UTUOZ| OYAWI-TVYIINIJISHY 

{SSETD 

T 

T 

T 

| 

| 

[ 

00 

Jetctelel 

CTTI665M 

HIONAT §,HI¥-£0 

¥661/T0/L0 

{000’SE 

070 

: 

Jakctcls 

MIHIO/QESO ION-TT 

ST0Z/£0/60 

|0 

5 gEN

ssueRay 

Aaj 

abeq 

® 

o3eq 

201d 

-quoxd 

‘paTITaen; 

X3qTT] 

918s 

JO 

SWIS] 

ates 

ates 

TIVID 

tAjunod 

9202/22/10 

uo pajurag 

JIHSNMOL 

SHAYH 

1UOTIOTPS TANS

Page 4

#+4PPBJURILNL JOU ING STURTT

1ue7 

(swell 

ung Jum 

po 

3x0ddng 

213d85 125 000 

19] 

$3000 

oT3ades Ted 

000T| 

T 

as 

2

Tom ISM) 

Tg) 

sz00q 

ToMBg oTIang) 

is 

IoqEM OTTARd 

as 

uoT

Isnos/sden ArT) 

USTUT] 

j

LVZ'TY 

SADL <= $06°0 

(TOOHMOHHOIAN 84DF) 

40% 

uBg ues 

30514 

1SSION | an0oTy qui oTWRIS) 

pooy 

TSL°L9 

99p ‘set 

isTe3oL 

SUTeM BTTE OTWeIs) 

60's 

€L8°%T 

¥8% 

380) 

eseyg 

T0074 BTTL OTWRXaD)| 

*oucy

(POUSTUTIUN) 

YOUI 

§T 

:UCTIEPUNOZ BUTPTS 

:I0TIeINT 

a 

:sserd 

I8MOUS d3eredeg 

¥o0T

sabres 

UTS eIxF| 

8z5’c 

z89°'p 

zg 

(£a03s 

1) 

ao 

19TTOL Rx3xT! 

j

. 

’ 

(Azoas 

1) 

dann 

But 

4 

ON: 

£€52°T 

SAA 

00T 

sono 

seen zo398 

seToq] 

0°0 

:$3STOP

662 

8zv'g 

T 

3993 OT 

‘TTeM Io3em 

Tenuey 

‘zousizosg! 

4’S 

0Lz'z 

£027 

1 

orades Tes 0001 

o3ny ‘I8UBIFO 

4's

I9MaS/ 193M 

y3eg eanaxTg 

*d°S 

SIUBWISNLPY/SUOTITPPY T9430 

Y3ed INIXTI 

T 

uoT

8EL'0G 

6566 

iTE30L 

(5) 2IMIXTd @besen 

7 

z88 

gets 

butp1s 

Azoas 

1 

Buteunia 

(er) 

1503 

-adeq 

 meN 1s0D 

°zTg 

UOTIRPURO 

IOTIXE 

$3T1038 

> 

- 

| 

seaxy Burprng 

nod] 

L 

ony] x] Rue] 

i 

¥S/00T/00T/00T/75=p00Y 

§ 

quod /uoom/ound/Ayd-qy/Aug 

§39T300 

‘09TH JO 

‘ON 

S

“dS 

788 

= e2IY I00TI 

dS 

¢88 

= PIV PUNO 

TT 

T 

Pa. 

S3IONQ 

/M ITY peorog 

:weisks bBurawem 

(17) 

| YIM 

[ 

"PIO[X 

a] 

0 378 

a 

st 

FHOLS 

T 

ATrtwed o7Buts 

tT :6P1 

‘SOM T0F 

'3ISE 3500 | 

serniwrd 30 

“TR00/ "oN 

pa3ad

ox 

| 

we3sds A3TInosg 

2071aI95 sduwig0T 

UNBTOUT

230 

eA 

TBIIUS 

tesay 3xodae)

Page 5

9202/22/

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.

25-003642 Ext Def PD Future Yrs.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

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

James P Hill,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

Petitioner,

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

MTT Docket No. 25-003642

Hayes Township,

Presiding Judge

Respondent.

Patricia L. Halm

ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR PETITIONER TO CURE DEFAULT

ORDER HOLDING RESPONDENT IN DEFAULT

ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL

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

holding Petitioner in default on October 22, 2025, because they failed to file a copy of

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

was required to cure the default, by obtaining a copy of the notice denying the poverty

exemption from Respondent and submit a copy to the Tribunal within 14 days.

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 the

dismissal of the case for failure to timely comply with this order.2

Additionally, the Tribunal finds that Respondent failed to file an answer. See TTR 281.

Respondent must file an answer within 14 days of entry of this order. Small Claims

answer forms can be found on our website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib.

Finally, the Tribunal finds that Petitioner is appealing assessments for future tax years.

The Tribunal has no authority to consider assessments until they have been established

by the March Board of Review and assessments for future tax years have not yet been

established. Further, pursuant to MCL 211.7u, a person claiming a poverty exemption

must file a claim annually.

Therefore,

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

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).

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003642

Page 2 of 2

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

default: (1) file a copy of the notice denying poverty exemption, (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 entry of this order.3

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent is held in DEFAULT.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Responded must do the following to cure the default:

file an answer. The foregoing must be filed with the Tribunal within 14 days of entry of

this order.

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

237, or Respondent being required to file a Motion to Set Aside Default with the

applicable filing fee, as provided by TTR 231.4

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s assessment appeal is PARTIALLY

DISMISSED. The appeal shall continue for the 2025 tax year only.

Entered: January 21, 2026

By _____________________________

kac/jc

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

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).

4 See also MCL 205.732.