Joseph A Winfield, Petitioner V City Of Detroit, Respondent

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

GOVERNOR 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR 

 

 

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

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

Joseph A Winfield, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

 

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 4, 2024, because Petitioner failed to pay the full amount due when 

filing the petition. No response was received, and on November 12, 2024, the Tribunal 

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

filed a Motion to Set Aside Default on November 13, 2024, but failed to include the 

remaining filing fee for filing the petition, failed to include the motion filing fee, and failed 

to submit proof the motion was served on Respondent. The Tribunal issued a Notice of 

No Action on January 28, 2025, indicating that without the proof of service the Tribunal 

would not take action on the motion, and allowed Petitioner 14 days to respond. 

Petitioner failed to respond and, on March 5, 2025, the Tribunal dismissed this case. 

Petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration on March 24, 2025, indicating the failure to 

respond was not willful, just simply that Petitioner was unaware of how to properly set 

aside the default. On April 30, 2025, the Tribunal granted the motion and issued an 

Order Reinstating the Case and an Order Holding Petitioner in Default, again, requiring 

Petitioner to pay the additional $100.00 filing fee owed for filing the petition, pay the 

$25.00 filling fee for the filing of the Motion to Set Aside Default, and file proof the 

Motion to Set Aside Default was served on Respondent. Petitioner has not responded, 

and thus has not complied numerous orders, with the later stating 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 

 

 

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

2 Id. at 149.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

Page 2 of 3 

 

Here, Petitioner has failed to comply with multiple Tribunal orders and failed to properly 

set aside their default which 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

Page 3

M

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 

Joseph A Winfield, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

 

City of Detroit, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Jason C. Grinnell 

 

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

 

ORDER REINSTATING CASE 

 

ORDER HOLDING PETITIONER IN DEFAULT 

 

On March 24, 2025, Petitioner filed a motion requesting that the Tribunal reconsider the 

Order of Dismissal entered in this case on March 5, 2025. In the motion, Petitioner 

states that they did not intentionally refuse to comply with the Tribunal’s orders and that 

they were unaware of the motion filing fee requirement. 

 

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

demonstrated a palpable error relative to the Order of Dismissal that misled the Tribunal 

and the parties and that would have resulted in a different disposition if the error was 

corrected.1 Specifically, the Tribunal finds that Petitioner has demonstrated a history of 

failing to comply with Tribunal orders and rules by not paying the required filing fees, 

failing to respond to the original Order of Default, only partially complying with the Order 

Extending Default, and failing to respond to the Notion of No Action. Given Petitioner’s 

statement that these failures were not intentional, the Tribunal finds no deliberate delay 

by Petitioner.2 Further, there is no indication that Respondent has suffered any 

prejudice.3 Petitioner still has not paid the fees required for the filing of the petition and 

the Motion to Set Aside Default, however, or filed proof that the Motion to Set Aside 

Default was served on Respondent. Petitioner is subject to default as a result, and 

failure to fully comply with this order will be considered both willful and deliberate so as 

to warrant dismissal of the case.4 

 

Therefore, 

 

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

 

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). 

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

3 Id. At 149. 

4 See TTR 237.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

Page 2 of 2 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the case is REINSTATED. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is HELD IN DEFAULT. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner shall (1) pay the remaining $100.00 owed for 

the petition filing fee, (2) pay the $25.00 motion fee for the Motion to Set Aside Default, 

and (3) file proof the Motion to Set Aside Default was served on Respondent. The 

foregoing must be filed with the Tribunal within 14 days of the entry of this order.5 

 

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

237.6 

 

 

Entered: April 30, 2025 

 

 

By _______________________________ 

cs 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

I certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent on the

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 

Joseph A Winfield, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

 

City of Detroit, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Jason C. Grinnell 

 

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

 

ORDER REINSTATING CASE 

 

ORDER HOLDING PETITIONER IN DEFAULT 

 

On March 24, 2025, Petitioner filed a motion requesting that the Tribunal reconsider the 

Order of Dismissal entered in this case on March 5, 2025. In the motion, Petitioner 

states that they did not intentionally refuse to comply with the Tribunal’s orders and that 

they were unaware of the motion filing fee requirement. 

 

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

demonstrated a palpable error relative to the Order of Dismissal that misled the Tribunal 

and the parties and that would have resulted in a different disposition if the error was 

corrected.1 Specifically, the Tribunal finds that Petitioner has demonstrated a history of 

failing to comply with Tribunal orders and rules by not paying the required filing fees, 

failing to respond to the original Order of Default, only partially complying with the Order 

Extending Default, and failing to respond to the Notion of No Action. Given Petitioner’s 

statement that these failures were not intentional, the Tribunal finds no deliberate delay 

by Petitioner.2 Further, there is no indication that Respondent has suffered any 

prejudice.3 Petitioner still has not paid the fees required for the filing of the petition and 

the Motion to Set Aside Default, however, or filed proof that the Motion to Set Aside 

Default was served on Respondent. Petitioner is subject to default as a result, and 

failure to fully comply with this order will be considered both willful and deliberate so as 

to warrant dismissal of the case.4 

 

Therefore, 

 

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

 

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). 

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

3 Id. At 149. 

4 See TTR 237.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

Page 2 of 2 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the case is REINSTATED. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is HELD IN DEFAULT. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner shall (1) pay the remaining $100.00 owed for 

the petition filing fee, (2) pay the $25.00 motion fee for the Motion to Set Aside Default, 

and (3) file proof the Motion to Set Aside Default was served on Respondent. The 

foregoing must be filed with the Tribunal within 14 days of the entry of this order.5 

 

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

237.6 

 

 

Entered: April 30, 2025 

 

 

By _______________________________ 

cs 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

I certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent on the

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 

MAR 2 8 2025 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Joseph A Winfield, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

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 4, 2024, because Petitioner did not pay the full required petition filing 

fee. 

On November 12, 2024, the Tribunal extended the time for Petitioner to cure the 

default by an additional 14 days and they have failed to respond. 

Specifically, while 

Petitioner did attempt to file a Motion to Set Aside Default, Petitioner did not pay the 

required fee for the filing of the motion. As a result, the Tribunal entered a Notice of No 

Action on January 28, 2025, and indicated Petitioner must submit the motion fee within 

14 days or else the motion would not be properly pending. 

Petitioner was allowed 

sufficient time to respond, but no motion filing fee was submitted. As a result, no action 

shall be taken with respect to the motion. 

Petitioner has not complied with multiple Tribunal orders, 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, considering the factors involved and considering all

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

£0 

mn. 

2 

rage Ete 

IT {S 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

Page 3

J

Page 4

>

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.

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 

Joseph A Winfield, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

 

City of Detroit, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Jason C. Grinnell 

 

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

 

ORDER REINSTATING CASE 

 

ORDER HOLDING PETITIONER IN DEFAULT 

 

On March 24, 2025, Petitioner filed a motion requesting that the Tribunal reconsider the 

Order of Dismissal entered in this case on March 5, 2025. In the motion, Petitioner 

states that they did not intentionally refuse to comply with the Tribunal’s orders and that 

they were unaware of the motion filing fee requirement. 

 

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

demonstrated a palpable error relative to the Order of Dismissal that misled the Tribunal 

and the parties and that would have resulted in a different disposition if the error was 

corrected.1 Specifically, the Tribunal finds that Petitioner has demonstrated a history of 

failing to comply with Tribunal orders and rules by not paying the required filing fees, 

failing to respond to the original Order of Default, only partially complying with the Order 

Extending Default, and failing to respond to the Notion of No Action. Given Petitioner’s 

statement that these failures were not intentional, the Tribunal finds no deliberate delay 

by Petitioner.2 Further, there is no indication that Respondent has suffered any 

prejudice.3 Petitioner still has not paid the fees required for the filing of the petition and 

the Motion to Set Aside Default, however, or filed proof that the Motion to Set Aside 

Default was served on Respondent. Petitioner is subject to default as a result, and 

failure to fully comply with this order will be considered both willful and deliberate so as 

to warrant dismissal of the case.4 

 

Therefore, 

 

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

 

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). 

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

3 Id. At 149. 

4 See TTR 237.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

Page 2 of 2 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the case is REINSTATED. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner is HELD IN DEFAULT. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner shall (1) pay the remaining $100.00 owed for 

the petition filing fee, (2) pay the $25.00 motion fee for the Motion to Set Aside Default, 

and (3) file proof the Motion to Set Aside Default was served on Respondent. The 

foregoing must be filed with the Tribunal within 14 days of the entry of this order.5 

 

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

237.6 

 

 

Entered: April 30, 2025 

 

 

By _______________________________ 

cs 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

I certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent on the

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 

APR 22 2025 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

D SANE ESN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner(s) 

v 

MTT Docket No. 4H 003653 

QA Were 

ASE e Sed 

Respondent(s) 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

AN 

0 

Soetce 

pantie) 

states that on Ve 

he/she 

[Name of person serving/mailing petition] 

[date of service] 

served a copy of the ¥ xxx x 

/ NXE 

alative to the above-captioned matter upon: 

[Provide name and address of the party/people being served] 

CITY Drassiy 

AS 5H0o 

C ay ng 

7 Weed wed 

Dex 

oy 

NETL 

Oo 

[Signgture Ofperson who is sefving/mailing copy] 

Ned HA 

gn ered 

[Print/type name of person serving/mailing copy]

Page 2

Te rermomecr 480 

ee 

eee 

ROPLEXY MI 

480 

En Nu 

am, Nu 

i 

(WY 33 

Brads 

y 

Q 

b 

17 A FR 2025 

PM ISL 

Der owt WEIS 

te, 

G13 

FR 

A YRTAN wan 

ax TES ws \ 

Wo \\ 

WY. 

OF Tawa 

oF 

Vassing 0 

45533 

a 

Hippie Tipjf [itlldipis Ijin ail];

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

Joseph A Winfield, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

 MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

City of Detroit,

Respondent.

NOTICE OF NO ACTION

TAKE NOTICE that the Tribunal has received Motion for Reconsideration (“document”). 

You were, however, required to file proof demonstrating the service of that document on 

the opposing party (“proof of service”) and no proof of service has been filed.1 As such, 

the document is not properly pending and no action will be taken unless the required 

proof of service is filed within 14 days of the issuance of this notice. If the required proof 

of service is not filed within 14 days, you will be required to re-file the document with the 

appropriate filing fee and proof that the re-filed document was served on the opposing 

party.

Entered: March 28, 2025

By: Tribunal Clerk

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

1 See TTR 225(7) and 227(12).

Page 2

Joseph A Winfield

17373 Bradford

Detroit , MI 48205

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

Joseph A Winfield, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

 MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

City of Detroit,

Respondent.

NOTICE OF NO ACTION

TAKE NOTICE that the Tribunal has received Motion for Reconsideration (“document”). 

You were, however, required to file proof demonstrating the service of that document on 

the opposing party (“proof of service”) and no proof of service has been filed.2 As such, 

the document is not properly pending and no action will be taken unless the required 

proof of service is filed within 14 days of the issuance of this notice. If the required proof 

of service is not filed within 14 days, you will be required to re-file the document with the 

appropriate filing fee and proof that the re-filed document was served on the opposing 

party.

Entered: March 28, 2025

By: Tribunal Clerk

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

2 See TTR 225(7) and 227(12).

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

Joseph

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 

MAR 2 8 2025 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Joseph A Winfield, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

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 4, 2024, because Petitioner did not pay the full required petition filing 

fee. 

On November 12, 2024, the Tribunal extended the time for Petitioner to cure the 

default by an additional 14 days and they have failed to respond. 

Specifically, while 

Petitioner did attempt to file a Motion to Set Aside Default, Petitioner did not pay the 

required fee for the filing of the motion. As a result, the Tribunal entered a Notice of No 

Action on January 28, 2025, and indicated Petitioner must submit the motion fee within 

14 days or else the motion would not be properly pending. 

Petitioner was allowed 

sufficient time to respond, but no motion filing fee was submitted. As a result, no action 

shall be taken with respect to the motion. 

Petitioner has not complied with multiple Tribunal orders, 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, considering the factors involved and considering all

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

£0 

mn. 

2 

rage Ete 

IT {S 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

Page 3

J

Page 4

>

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.

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 

Joseph A Winfield, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

 

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 4, 2024, because Petitioner did not pay the full required petition filing 

fee. On November 12, 2024, the Tribunal extended the time for Petitioner to cure the 

default by an additional 14 days and they have failed to respond. Specifically, while 

Petitioner did attempt to file a Motion to Set Aside Default, Petitioner did not pay the 

required fee for the filing of the motion. As a result, the Tribunal entered a Notice of No 

Action on January 28, 2025, and indicated Petitioner must submit the motion fee within 

14 days or else the motion would not be properly pending. Petitioner was allowed 

sufficient time to respond, but no motion filing fee was submitted. As a result, no action 

shall be taken with respect to the motion. 

 

Petitioner has not complied with multiple Tribunal orders, 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, considering 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, 

 

 

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

2 Id. at 149.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

Page 2 of 2 

 

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

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

Joseph A Winfield, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

 MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

City of Detroit,

Respondent.

NOTICE OF NO ACTION

TAKE NOTICE that the Tribunal has reviewed the file in the above-captioned case and 

finds that:

Petitioner has filed a Motion to Set Aside Default with no filing fee. You were, however, 

required to pay a fee for the filing of the motion. 

If you want the Tribunal to take action on the Motion, you are required to pay the $25.00 

filing fee due and submit documentation indicating that the opposing party has been 

notified of that payment within 14 days.

If the required filing fee is not paid and/or the required notice is not submitted within 14 

days, you will be required to refile the Motion with the full filing fee. The refiled Motion 

will be considered filed as of the date of the refiling. Unfortunately, the payment may not 

be made via e-filing; the fee, paid by check or money order, must be sent by mail or 

designated delivery service.

You must include a copy of this Notice with the required submission.

Entered: January 28, 2025

By: Tribunal Clerk

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-003653

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 provided by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

Page 3

Joseph A Winfield

17373 Bradford

Detroit , MI 48205

Page 4

MTT Docket No. 24-003653

Page 4 of 7

Joseph A Winfield, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

 MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

City of Detroit,

Respondent.

NOTICE OF NO ACTION

TAKE NOTICE that the Tribunal has reviewed the file in the above-captioned case and 

finds that:

Petitioner has filed a Motion to Set Aside Default with no filing fee. You were, however, 

required to pay a fee for the filing of the motion. 

If you want the Tribunal to take action on the Motion, you are required to pay the $25.00 

filing fee due and submit documentation indicating that the opposing party has been 

notified of that payment within 14 days.

If the required filing fee is not paid and/or the required notice is not submitted within 14 

days, you will be required to refile the Motion with the full filing fee. The refiled Motion 

will be considered filed as of the date of the refiling. Unfortunately, the payment may not 

be made via e-filing; the fee, paid by check or money order, must be sent by mail or 

designated delivery service.

You must include a copy of this Notice with the required submission.

Entered: January 28, 2025

By: Tribunal Clerk

Page 5

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

PROOF OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy

Page 6

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 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

’ 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

PRECTOR 

50 

| 

35 

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL ANSWER FORM 

é 

PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE EXEMPTION / QUALIFIED AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTION 

WITT DOCKETNO, 

=H = 80 35 

© 

Section. 1: Respondent’s Contact Information 

Unit of Government: 

& 

CNT 

x 

ERY LT ToT 

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

First 

EN 5 «R N 

EY 

Last oy Ns RN 

Firm Name (if any) . 

| 

Address (No., Street, P.Q, 2, 

or Rural © 

TIES 

ead Kod 

Oityor'Town 

State 

ZIP Cade 

Ve 

| 

ARS 

Telephone Number 

i 

“ 

. 

Fax Number 

313 \D 

3 WY 

E-mail Address (donot enter unless you want MTT to send all corre: 

lence via 

e-mall) 

TXICTRC 

Lads 

ota) orig 

\ FANS EW 

Section 3: Subject Property Information 

Parcel Identification:Nuniber(s): 

ZAR 

kb 553 

"Are the parcels 

listed by Petitioner contiguous or adjoining? 

If not, list which parcels are adjoining (i.e, touch), 

O ves 

MN No 

[J 

Not Applicable 

Classification of. Property: 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial eR 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental u 

(check one) 

RECEIVED 

NOV 2 1 2024 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Ra 

o_o 

# 

Eo4-0i3wsL" 125 

BanansC < 4 Ls

Page 2

ps, 

Roel 

obec... 

. 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

H-DORESS 

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL ANSWER FORM 

PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE EXEMPTION / QUALIFIED AGRICULTURAL 

EXEMPTION 

MTT DOCKET 

NO. 

CV = 0034 3.4 

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact Information 

Unit of Government 

. 

CNY 

ox 

Dex coi 

\ 

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

First Nam: 

. 

M1 

Last Name 

R 

Dever 

x 

NESTE SELVA 

Firm Name (if any) 

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

UIs 

Grods ocd 

City or Town 

State 

2iP Code 

DV wi 

Se 

MELD 

Telephone Number 

Fax Number 

TAY VD T3NK 

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

Toot 

e 

se 

ade nea) 

Dues 1) 

© 

Yoon, (NANNY 

Section 3: Subject Property Information 

Parcet tdentification Number(s): 

AV ASL eS 

Are the parcels listed by Petitioner contiguous or adjoining? 

If not, list which parcels are adjoining (i.e. touch), 

[ves 

JM No 

[J Not applicable 

Classification of Property: 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial - 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

(check one)

Page 3

as 

i 

S 

; 

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 

INSEE 

Cored 

ta 

Diese 

Lee 

o X¥% ane 

ANRNNG 

Section 5: Jurisdictional Issues 

List 

the tax 

year(s) denied: 

& tax year(s) 

dente 

2823 

— 

2 

0 

24 

Clieck what action prompted this appeal: 

5 Notice of Denial of Principal Residence Exemption was issuad TR peniat by Board of Review [| Denial by Dept. of Treasury 

Other 

: 

If you checked “other” abiove explain: 

If Petitioner 

is appealing from a Board of Review denlal, check which Board of Review took action; 

™ March. Say 

[1] December 

List the date the Principal Residence Exemption or Qualified Agricultural Exemption was denled: 

Signature *Required 

Respondent or Attornay/Aythorized Representative’s Signatu 

fel 

Se 

Gud 

NO 

N

Page 4

®

Page 5

de

Page 6

R

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

Joseph A Winfield, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

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 4, 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 and/or petition filing fee required by the October 4, 

2024 default order, (2) file a Motion to Set Aside Default, (3) pay the $25.00 Motion fee, 

and (4) file proof the Motion and a copy of the documentation and/or petition filing fee 

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 12, 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. 24-003653

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

Joseph A Winfield

17373 Bradford

Detroit , MI 48205

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

Joseph A Winfield, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003653 

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 4, 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

Page 5

MTT

Page 6

STAT

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

Joseph A Winfield,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003653

City of Detroit,

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.

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.

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.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-003653

Page 2 of 7

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

email taxtrib@michigan.gov.

By: Tribunal Clerk

Entered: November 1, 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 3

Joseph A Winfield

17373 Bradford

Detroit , MI 48205

Page 4

STATE OF

Page 5

MTT Docket

Page 6

S

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

Page 1

RECEIVED 

0CT 18 2024 

MI 

: 

; 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

CHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON 1. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNCR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL ANSWER FORM 

VALUATION / EXEMPTION / CLASSIFICATION APPEAL 

MTT DOCKET NO. 24-003653 

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact information 

First Name: 

ML: 

Last Name/Company NamefUnit of Government: 

Dorothy 

Manley 

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

County: 

2 Woodward Ave. Ste. 804 

Wayne 

City or Town: 

State: 

ZIP Code: 

Detroit 

Ml 

48226 

Telephone Number: 

Fax Number: 

313-775-0872 

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

manleyd@detroitmi.gov 

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

First Name: 

Last Name: 

Firm Name (if any): 

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 email): 

Section 3: Subject Property Information 

Does the subject property have a Principal Residence Exemption of 50% or more? 

[| Yes 

[rv] No 

Are the parcels listed by Petitioner contiguous or adjoining? 

If not, list which parcels adjoin one another. 

[ves 

[Ine 

Not Applicable

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 appeal their 2024 assessment where a reduction was granted due to the 

condition of the property. The condition was changed from average condition to fair 

condition. We are requesting that this appeal be dismissed. 

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)? [7] Yes 

[i] No 

If yes, check which BOR Petitioner attended: 

March 

|] July 

[I] December 

If no, was the Notice of Assessment properly sent to Petitioner prior to the March BOR? [ll] Yes 

[I] No 

*Submit a copy of the Notice of Assessment with the Answer. 

If the July or December BOR revised the assessment(s) at issue, did it have authority? [1] Yes 

[Wm] No 

If yes, cite the Board's authority. 

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

No 

If yes, explain 

Is Petitioner appealing from a State Tax Commission Order? 

1 Yes 

[A no 

{f so, what is the issue date? 

IF PETITIONER IS APPEALING THE UNCAPPING OF TAXABLE VALUE

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Did Petitioner request a Poverty Exemption at a BOR? [ml] Yes 

[i] No 

If Yes, check which BOR Petitioner attended: [W] March 

|] July 

Od December 

List the date the BOR denied Petitioner's Poverty Exemption: 

IF PETITIONER 1S APPEALING THE DENIAL OF AN EXEMPTION 

OTHER THAN POVERTY, PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE, OR QUALIFIED AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTIONS 

Did Petitioner request the exemption at a BOR? [Wa] Yes 

[a] No 

if Yes, check which BOR Petitioner attended: [] March 

[1 July 

[] December 

Tax Year(s) denied: 

List the date the exemption was denied: 

What statutory section

Page 4

Col

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

Joseph A Winfield,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v

 

MTT Docket No. 24-003653

City of Detroit,

Respondent.

ORDER OF DEFAULT

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

Petitioner did not pay the full required fee for the filing of the petition. See TTR 267. As 

such, the appeal is not properly pending. Petitioner must pay the additional fee amount 

required for the filing of the petition within 14 days of the entry of this Order. A filing fee 

calculator can be found on our website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib. Unfortunately, the 

payment may not be made via e-filing.

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 4, 2024

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-003653

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

Joseph A Winfield

17373 Bradford

Detroit , MI 48205

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

Joseph A Winfield,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v

 

MTT Docket No. 24-003653

City of Detroit,

Respondent.

ORDER OF DEFAULT

The Tribunal

Page 5

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 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

RECEIVED 

JUL 11 2024 

SCHIGHNCTAX TRIBHN Ase 

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. 

submit this document, you may be held in default. 

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 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information 

First Name 

N 

os < RN 

M.1. 

+ Last Name/Company Name 

WD 

iy <\ AY 

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

= 

\ 

\\5N > 

DS too 

K Ny 

City or Town 

Oe 

State 

om 

ZIP Code 

. 

REE 

Telephone Number 

2\ A L\DS 34K 

Fax Number 

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

Section 2: Petitioner’s Atlorneyihutiiorized Representative’s Contact Information 

First Name 

Last Name 

Firm Name (if any) 

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

) 

105 

\ 

- City or Town 

State 

Z|P 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 

parcels are you 

Yes* 

No** 

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

Sle)

Page 2

RECEIVED 

JUL 11 2024 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

GOVERNOR 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFF; 

LANSING 

WEican 

a 

(919) 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

TAX TRRIRGRAPR 

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. 

submit this document, you may be held in default. 

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 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information 

First Nam 

AY ?SRR |S 

oN 

Last Name/Company Name 

Was 2) 

a 

Ye 

| 

Mailing Address (No., Street, P.O. Box or 

Qc 

pig 

b) 

ES 

Kor 

Zyy VE 

IBYE 

City or Town 

State 

ZIP Code 

E 

Eh 

Sa 

My 

BLELSS 

Telephone Number 

Fax Number 

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

Section 2: Petitioner’s BRAEREYINGL IGT Gee] Representative’s Contact Information 

First Name 

Last Name 

Firm Name (if any) 

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 

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

Page 3

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) 

Wl True Cash and Taxable Value 

[O Poverty Exemption 

. 

J Taxable Value

Page 4

ST

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

Joseph A Winfield,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003653

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 4, 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

Joseph A Winfield

17373 Bradford

Detroit , MI 48205

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

Joseph A Winfield,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003653

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 4, 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,

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

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

RECEIVED 

JUL 11 2024 

SCHIGHNCTAX TRIBHN Ase 

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. 

submit this document, you may be held in default. 

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 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information 

First Name 

N 

os < RN 

M.1. 

+ Last Name/Company Name 

WD 

iy <\ AY 

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

= 

\ 

\\5N > 

DS too 

K Ny 

City or Town 

Oe 

State 

om 

ZIP Code 

. 

REE 

Telephone Number 

2\ A L\DS 34K 

Fax Number 

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

Section 2: Petitioner’s Atlorneyihutiiorized Representative’s Contact Information 

First Name 

Last Name 

Firm Name (if any) 

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

) 

105 

\ 

- City or Town 

State 

Z|P 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 

parcels are you 

Yes* 

No** 

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

Sle)

Page 2

RECEIVED 

JUL 11 2024 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

GOVERNOR 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFF; 

LANSING 

WEican 

a 

(919) 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

TAX TRRIRGRAPR 

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. 

submit this document, you may be held in default. 

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 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information 

First Nam 

AY ?SRR |S 

oN 

Last Name/Company Name 

Was 2) 

a 

Ye 

| 

Mailing Address (No., Street, P.O. Box or 

Qc 

pig 

b) 

ES 

Kor 

Zyy VE 

IBYE 

City or Town 

State 

ZIP Code 

E 

Eh 

Sa 

My 

BLELSS 

Telephone Number 

Fax Number 

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

Section 2: Petitioner’s BRAEREYINGL IGT Gee] Representative’s Contact Information 

First Name 

Last Name 

Firm Name (if any) 

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 

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

Page 3

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) 

Wl True Cash and Taxable Value 

[O Poverty Exemption 

. 

J Taxable Value

Page 4

ST

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.