Joanne L Battle, Petitioner V City Of Detroit, Respondent

Page 1

Coleman A. Young Municipal Center 

2 Woodward Avenue, Suite 105 

Detroit, Michigan 48226 

Phone: (313) 628-0722 

Fax: (313) 224-4576 

www.detroitmi.gov 

Board of Review 

RECEIVED 

RECCIVED 

05/16/2024 

JAN 2 9 2025 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

TRINITY CDC 

franinfo: 4606 

25915460-1 

OL/2U/ 5 

15125 BURT RD 

Chiit= 

139%7 

ut: $300.00 Ep 

DETROIT 

MI 48223 

. 

10: 

HT VERNON MISSIONARY BAFTIRT CHURCH 

RE: 

2024 

MARCH BOARD OF REVIEW PETITION NUMBER: 

M-67762 

The March Board of Review has considered the appeal on the 2024 assessment for the below described property 

and concluded that: 

FINDING OF FACTS: 

1. 

Parcel Number: 

22107651. 

2. 

Property Address: 

15084 BURT 

3. 

District: 

1 

4. 

Property Classification: 

402 

(RESIDENTIAL-VACANT) 

Ad Valorem 

6. 

Principle Residence Exemption: 

% 

5. 

Property Legal Description: 

E BURT 98 B E TAYLORS BRIGHTMOOR SUB L44 P3 PLATS, W C R 22/493 34 X 120.37A 

6. 

Petitioner timely filed an appeal to the March Board of Review. 

7. The March Board of Review considered 

(if any) petitioner's and/or duly authorized representative evidence 

and/or testimony. The March Board of Review considered facts presented as on the assessment roll and/or any 

recommendations offered by the Office of the Assessor. 

CONCLUSION: 

Taxable Value Uncapping due to Proposal A of 1994 

Before Appeal 

After Appeal 

2024 

Assessed Value 

300 

300 

2024 

Taxable Value 

300 

’ 

300 

If you are dissatisfied with the decision of the March Board of Review, submit this notice and complete the enclosed 

small claims form to appeal to: 

Michigan Tax Tribunal 

P.O. Box 30232 

Lansing 

MI 48909 

A Michigan Tax Tribunal appeal must be made 

by May 31st of the current year 

for properties classified 

as: 

Personal, 

Industrial 

Personal 

and 

Utility 

Personal 

Property.

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

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? 

| 

[I] Yes 

[I] No 

Are you appealing ONLY the denial of a Poverty Exemption or Disabled Veterans Exemption? 

[] Yes 

J Ne 

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

3 

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 pe added for each additional parce! being appeated, 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 ist 

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. 

Signature *required 

om or Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Signature: 

Ist

Page 3

aT, 

asin 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON {. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Joanne L Battle, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003837 

City of Detroit, 

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 16, 2024, because they did not submit a copy of the notice giving 

rise to the appeal. 

On November 15, 2024, 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 shall 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 IS ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED.

Page 4

MTT Docket No. 24-003837 

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

Page 5

MT:

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

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

 

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 

Joanne L Battle, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 24-003837 

 

City of Detroit, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Jason C. Grinnell 

 

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

 

On January 23, 2025, Petitioner filed a motion requesting that the Tribunal reconsider 

the Order of Dismissal (order) entered in the above-captioned case on December 12, 

2024. The motion constitutes a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal, a copy of 

the order, and a payment. 

 

The Tribunal has considered the motion and the case file and finds that it “may order a 

rehearing or reconsideration of any decision or order upon its own initiative or motion 

filed within 21 days after the entry of the decision or order sought to be reheard or 

reconsidered.”1 Petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration was filed beyond this 21-day 

deadline, and as a result, is not properly pending before the Tribunal.2 Further, the 

notice giving rise to the appeal indicates that the petition arises from the March Bord of 

Review, and Petitioner did not submit the petition by the statutory deadline of July 31, 

2024.3 The Tribunal has no equitable power to waive or otherwise disregard a statutory 

requirement or filing deadline, it has no authority to grant Petitioner the relief 

requested.4 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 

 

1 TTR 257(1). 

2 See also Pars Ice Cream Co, Inc v Dep’t of Treasury, unpublished per curiam opinion of the Court of 

Appeals, issued August 14, 2012 (Docket No. 305148). 

3 MCL 205.735a(6). 

4 The Tribunal’s powers are limited to those authorized by statute and do not include powers of equity. 

See Federal-Mogul Corp v Dep’t of Treasury, 161 Mich App 346 (1987), Elec Data Sys Corp v Flint Twp, 

253 Mich App 538 (2002), and VanderWerp v Plainfield Twp, 278 Mich App 624 (2008).

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-003837 

Page 2 of 2 

 

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 4, 2025 

 

By _______________________________ 

bw 

 

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

Coleman A. Young Municipal Center 

2 Woodward Avenue, Suite 105 

Detroit, Michigan 48226 

Phone: (313) 628-0722 

Fax: (313) 224-4576 

www.detroitmi.gov 

Board of Review 

RECEIVED 

RECCIVED 

05/16/2024 

JAN 2 9 2025 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

TRINITY CDC 

franinfo: 4606 

25915460-1 

OL/2U/ 5 

15125 BURT RD 

Chiit= 

139%7 

ut: $300.00 Ep 

DETROIT 

MI 48223 

. 

10: 

HT VERNON MISSIONARY BAFTIRT CHURCH 

RE: 

2024 

MARCH BOARD OF REVIEW PETITION NUMBER: 

M-67762 

The March Board of Review has considered the appeal on the 2024 assessment for the below described property 

and concluded that: 

FINDING OF FACTS: 

1. 

Parcel Number: 

22107651. 

2. 

Property Address: 

15084 BURT 

3. 

District: 

1 

4. 

Property Classification: 

402 

(RESIDENTIAL-VACANT) 

Ad Valorem 

6. 

Principle Residence Exemption: 

% 

5. 

Property Legal Description: 

E BURT 98 B E TAYLORS BRIGHTMOOR SUB L44 P3 PLATS, W C R 22/493 34 X 120.37A 

6. 

Petitioner timely filed an appeal to the March Board of Review. 

7. The March Board of Review considered 

(if any) petitioner's and/or duly authorized representative evidence 

and/or testimony. The March Board of Review considered facts presented as on the assessment roll and/or any 

recommendations offered by the Office of the Assessor. 

CONCLUSION: 

Taxable Value Uncapping due to Proposal A of 1994 

Before Appeal 

After Appeal 

2024 

Assessed Value 

300 

300 

2024 

Taxable Value 

300 

’ 

300 

If you are dissatisfied with the decision of the March Board of Review, submit this notice and complete the enclosed 

small claims form to appeal to: 

Michigan Tax Tribunal 

P.O. Box 30232 

Lansing 

MI 48909 

A Michigan Tax Tribunal appeal must be made 

by May 31st of the current year 

for properties classified 

as: 

Personal, 

Industrial 

Personal 

and 

Utility 

Personal 

Property.

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

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? 

| 

[I] Yes 

[I] No 

Are you appealing ONLY the denial of a Poverty Exemption or Disabled Veterans Exemption? 

[] Yes 

J Ne 

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

3 

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 pe added for each additional parce! being appeated, 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 ist 

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. 

Signature *required 

om or Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Signature: 

Ist

Page 3

aT, 

asin 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON {. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Joanne L Battle, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003837 

City of Detroit, 

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 16, 2024, because they did not submit a copy of the notice giving 

rise to the appeal. 

On November 15, 2024, 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 shall 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 IS ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED.

Page 4

MTT Docket No. 24-003837 

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

Page 5

MT:

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

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

 

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 

Joanne L Battle, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 24-003837 

 

City of Detroit, 

 

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 16, 2024, because they did not submit a copy of the notice giving 

rise to the appeal. On November 15, 2024, 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 shall 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. 24-003837 

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 12, 2024 

 

 

By _____________________________ 

bw/jcr 

 

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

Joanne L Battle, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003837 

City of Detroit,

Respondent.

ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR PETITIONER TO CURE DEFAULT 

The Tribunal has considered the file in the above-captioned case and finds that it 

entered an order holding Petitioner in default on October 16, 2024 .1 Petitioner was 

required to cure the default 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 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 the documentation required by the October 16, 2024 default order, (2) 

file a Motion to Set Aside Default, and (3) file proof the Motion and a copy of the 

documentation were served on Respondent. The foregoing must be filed with the 

Tribunal within 14 days of the entry of this Order.

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

TTR 231.3 

By:___________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: November 15, 2024

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 See also MCL 205.732.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-003837

Page 2 of 7

PROOF OF SERVICE

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

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

or email addresses on file, as provide by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

Page 3

Joanne L Battle

15125 Burt Road

Detroit , MI 48233

Page 4

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA

DIRECTOR

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL · 611 W. OTTAWA ST., LANSING, MI 48933 · 517-335-9760

PO BOX 30232, LANSING, MI 48909 · Other Carriers: 2407 N. GRAND RIVER AVE., LANSING, MI 48906

Joanne L Battle, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003837 

City of Detroit,

Respondent.

ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR PETITIONER TO CURE DEFAULT 

The Tribunal has considered the file in the above-captioned case and finds that it 

entered an order holding Petitioner in default on October 16, 2024 .4 Petitioner was 

required to cure the default 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 dismissal of the case for failure to timely comply with 

this Order.5 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 the documentation required by the October 16, 2024 default order, (2) 

file a Motion to Set Aside Default, and (3) file proof the Motion and a copy of the 

documentation were served on Respondent. The foregoing must be filed with the 

Tribunal within 14 days of the entry of this Order.

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

TTR 231.6 

By:___________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: November 15, 2024

4 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).” 

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

6 See also MCL 205.732.

Page 5

MTT Docket No. 24-003837

Page 5 of 7

PROOF OF SERVICE

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

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

or email addresses on file, as provide by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

Page 6

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

Joanne L Battle, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003837 

City of Detroit,

Respondent.

ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR PETITIONER TO CURE DEFAULT 

The Tribunal has considered the file in the above-captioned case and finds that it 

entered an order holding Petitioner in default on October 16, 2024 .7 Petitioner was 

required to cure the default 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 dismissal of the case for failure to timely comply with 

this Order.8 Therefore,

IT IS

Page 7

MTT

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

Joanne L Battle,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v

 

MTT Docket No. 24-003837

City of Detroit,

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 277. 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 16, 2024

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-003837

Page 2 of 5

PROOF OF SERVICE

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

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

or email addresses on file, as provide by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

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. 

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 219(5)

Page 3

Joanne L Battle

15125 Burt Road

Detroit , MI 48233

Page 4

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA

DIRECTOR

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL · 611 W. OTTAWA ST., LANSING, MI 48933 · 517-335-9760

PO BOX 30232, LANSING, MI 48909 · Other Carriers: 2407 N. GRAND RIVER AVE., LANSING, MI 48906

Joanne L Battle,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v

 

MTT Docket No. 24-003837

City of Detroit,

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 277. 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 16, 2024

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Page 5

MTT Docket No. 24-003837

Page 5 of 5

PROOF OF SERVICE

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

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

or email addresses on file, as provide by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

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 

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 219(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

RECEIVED 

AUG 0 8 2024 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL PETITION FORM 

VALUATION / EXEMPTION / CLASSIFICATION APPEAL 

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 submita copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal 

(e.g. Board of Review Decisiivor 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 

First 

Name 

Mm. 

Last 

e/Company Name 

Joanne 

L. 

edt 

fs 

ay Address {No., Street, 

P.O. Box or Rural Byute) 

45 RE 

Pyrt 

Kd. 

Beret + 

MT | 45223 

elephane Number 

Fax Number 

319-535-1355 

35°539-0304 

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

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

} 

First Name 

MI 

Last Name 

Same 

as 

pbs 

Firm Name {if any) 

. 

above 

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

City or Town 

State 

| ZIP Code 

Telephone Number 

Fax Number 

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

Section 3: Subject Property information 

How many 

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

parcelsareyou 

| [] vest 

[1] No*

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

. 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

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

[J True Cash and Taxable Value 

[1 Poverty Exemption 

BX Taxable Value Only (calculation) 

=] Disabled Veterans Exemption 

[A Uncapping of Taxable Value 

{7 Eligible Manufacturing Personal Property (ESA) 

[_1 Exemption from Taxation (other than the denial ofa 

[3 Classification 

Principat Residence or Qualified Agricultural Exemption) 

Section 5: Explain the Reason for this Appeal 

The reason for the appeal is to ask your organization to reconsider your decision not to allow the 

property/ parcel for tax exempt status. The property is used for community and church functions. In 

May the property is used for a carnival like program called May Day. There are rides and games for 

| 

the community. 

I 

During Easter season there is an egg hunt. Other parts of the year there are various activities on this 

parcel of land. Education, arts and crafts are also held there. 

Section 6: Jurisdictional Issues 

hE appealing: 

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

[IR] No 

if Yes, check which BOR you attended AND attach the BOR decision: [1 march 

[J wuly 

[J pecember 

if No, check the applicable reason(s): 

Not required to attend 

Assessment Change Notice was not received by Petitioner 

0 Appealing a purported Clerical Error or Mutual Mistake of Fact (if yes, include explanation in Section 5)

Page 3

: 

- 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON |. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Section 7: Valuation Information use te multipte parcel form for additional, contiguous parcels, 

Parcei Identification Number: 

2 AID765/ 

Classification of Property: 

Real 

Personal 

(check one) 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

industrial 

ET 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

 Wility 

(check one) 

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

30 

Current Taxable Value as established by the BOR: 

300 

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, 

I you believe the Taxable Value differs fram 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: 

Real 

Personal 

{check one) 

O 

0 

’ 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

(checkone) 

What do you believe is the property's classification? 

Reat 

Personat 

{check one) 

0 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utilily 

{check one) 

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

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

Page 4

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

’ 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Fee Information 

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

res 

1 No 

Are you appealing ONLY the denial of a Paverty Exemption or Disabled Veterans Exemption? 

[Hl] Yes 

Bf no 

If you answered yes to either or both of the above questions, you are not required to pay any filing lees. 

The filing fee is based on the greater of the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention, 

If you are appealing more thanone 

parcel, the parcel with the highest State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention will be used to determine your filing fee, pius 

$25.00 will be added for each additional parcel being appealed, not ta 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 

$0Over $500,000.00 

$300.00 

If your property is NOT residential property (see MCL 206.762) 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

Page 5

Rpt

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

Joanne L Battle,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003837

City of Detroit,

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 279. 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 16, 2024

PROOF OF SERVICE

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

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

or email addresses on file, as provide by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

Page 2

Joanne L Battle

15125 Burt Road

Detroit , MI 48233

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

Joanne L Battle,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003837

City of Detroit,

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 279. 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 16, 2024

PROOF OF SERVICE

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

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

or email addresses on file, as provide by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

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 

AUG 0 8 2024 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL PETITION FORM 

VALUATION / EXEMPTION / CLASSIFICATION APPEAL 

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 submita copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal 

(e.g. Board of Review Decisiivor 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 

First 

Name 

Mm. 

Last 

e/Company Name 

Joanne 

L. 

edt 

fs 

ay Address {No., Street, 

P.O. Box or Rural Byute) 

45 RE 

Pyrt 

Kd. 

Beret + 

MT | 45223 

elephane Number 

Fax Number 

319-535-1355 

35°539-0304 

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

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

} 

First Name 

MI 

Last Name 

Same 

as 

pbs 

Firm Name {if any) 

. 

above 

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

City or Town 

State 

| ZIP Code 

Telephone Number 

Fax Number 

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

Section 3: Subject Property information 

How many 

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

parcelsareyou 

| [] vest 

[1] No*

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

. 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

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

[J True Cash and Taxable Value 

[1 Poverty Exemption 

BX Taxable Value Only (calculation) 

=] Disabled Veterans Exemption 

[A Uncapping of Taxable Value 

{7 Eligible Manufacturing Personal Property (ESA) 

[_1 Exemption from Taxation (other than the denial ofa 

[3 Classification 

Principat Residence or Qualified Agricultural Exemption) 

Section 5: Explain the Reason for this Appeal 

The reason for the appeal is to ask your organization to reconsider your decision not to allow the 

property/ parcel for tax exempt status. The property is used for community and church functions. In 

May the property is used for a carnival like program called May Day. There are rides and games for 

| 

the community. 

I 

During Easter season there is an egg hunt. Other parts of the year there are various activities on this 

parcel of land. Education, arts and crafts are also held there. 

Section 6: Jurisdictional Issues 

hE appealing: 

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

[IR] No 

if Yes, check which BOR you attended AND attach the BOR decision: [1 march 

[J wuly 

[J pecember 

if No, check the applicable reason(s): 

Not required to attend 

Assessment Change Notice was not received by Petitioner 

0 Appealing a purported Clerical Error or Mutual Mistake of Fact (if yes, include explanation in Section 5)

Page 3

: 

- 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON |. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Section 7: Valuation Information use te multipte parcel form for additional, contiguous parcels, 

Parcei Identification Number: 

2 AID765/ 

Classification of Property: 

Real 

Personal 

(check one) 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

industrial 

ET 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

 Wility 

(check one) 

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

30 

Current Taxable Value as established by the BOR: 

300 

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, 

I you believe the Taxable Value differs fram 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: 

Real 

Personal 

{check one) 

O 

0 

’ 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

(checkone) 

What do you believe is the property's classification? 

Reat 

Personat 

{check one) 

0 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utilily 

{check one) 

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

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

Page 4

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

’ 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Fee Information 

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

res 

1 No 

Are you appealing ONLY the denial of a Paverty Exemption or Disabled Veterans Exemption? 

[Hl] Yes 

Bf no 

If you answered yes to either or both of the above questions, you are not required to pay any filing lees. 

The filing fee is based on the greater of the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention, 

If you are appealing more thanone 

parcel, the parcel with the highest State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention will be used to determine your filing fee, pius 

$25.00 will be added for each additional parcel being appealed, not ta 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 

$0Over $500,000.00 

$300.00 

If your property is NOT residential property (see MCL 206.762) 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

Page 5

Rpt

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.