Lawrence A Shaheen, Petitioner V Township Of Hartland, 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 

Lawrence A Shaheen, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 24-003536 

 

Hartland Township, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

 

The Tribunal issued a Proposed Order of Dismissal (POJ) on October 16, 2025. The 

POJ states, in pertinent part, “[t]he parties have 20 days from the ‘Entered’ date below 

to notify the Tribunal in writing, by mail or by electronic filing, if they do not agree with 

the POJ and to state in writing why they do not agree with the POJ (i.e., file exceptions 

to the POJ).” 

 

Neither party has filed exceptions to the POJ. 

 

The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) considered the testimony and evidence submitted 

and made specific findings of fact and conclusions of law. The ALJ’s determination that 

the Tribunal’s authority was not properly invoked is supported by the applicable 

statutory and case law. 

 

Given the above, the Tribunal adopts the POJ and finds that dismissal of this case is 

warranted.1 Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that the case is DISMISSED. 

 

This Order resolves the last pending claim 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 

 

1 See MCL 205.726.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-003536 

Page 2 of 2 

 

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. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By _____________________________ 

Entered: November 21, 2025 

cs 

 

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 

Lawrence A Shaheen, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 24-003536 

 

Hartland Township, 

 

Case Type: Valuation 

Respondent. 

 

PROPOSED ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

 

Personnel Presiding: 

 

 

Nancy Klukowski, Administrative Law Judge 

Location of Hearing: 

 

 

Telephone 

Hearing Held on: 

 

 

 

September 10, 2025 

Appearances on Behalf of Petitioners: 

Lawrence Shaheen 

Appearances on Behalf of Respondent: Amanda Carrigan, Assessor 

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY 

 

Petitioner was required to protest the subject property’s assessment to the Board of 

Review (BOR). Petitioner protested the subject property’s assessment to the 2024 

March BOR. The BOR did not change the assessment. 

 

Petitioner filed a petition with the Tribunal on June 10, 2024, and Respondent filed an 

answer on October 10, 2024. 

 

Petitioner’s petition included tax years from 1998 through 2024. On 

September 25, 2024, the Tribunal issued an order of partial dismissal, dismissing all 

prior years other than 2024, for lack of jurisdiction. On November 12, 2024, Petitioner 

filed a motion for reconsideration of the Tribunal’s partial dismissal order. On 

December 4, 2024, the Tribunal issued an order denying Petitioner’s motion for 

reconsideration. 

 

The amount of the state equalized value (SEV) or taxable value (TV) in dispute, as set 

forth in the pleadings, for all tax years at issue is within the jurisdictional limits of the 

Small Claims Division.1 Further, the property’s assessment for subsequent tax years is 

included in this proceeding.2 

 

ISSUES AND APPLICABLE LAW 

 

The issues in this matter are: 

 

1 See MCL 205.762(1). 

2 See MCL 205.737(5)(b).

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-003536 

Page 2 of 8 

 

 

1. Whether the subject property is assessed in excess of 50% of its true cash value 

(TCV). 

 

“The petitioner has the burden of proof in establishing the true cash value of the 

property.”3 

 

The assessment of real property in Michigan shall not exceed 50% of its TCV.4 “True 

cash value” means “the usual selling price . . . .”5 “True cash value” means “fair market 

value.”6 

 

The Tribunal is required to make an independent determination of TCV.7 “[T]he tribunal 

is not bound to accept either of the parties’ theories of valuation. It may accept one 

theory and reject the other, it may reject both theories, or it may utilize a combination of 

both in arriving at its determination.”8 

 

The Tribunal is required to select the valuation methodology that is accurate and bears 

a reasonable relationship to the property’s TCV.9 

 

2. Whether the TV exceeds the amount provided by MCL 211.27a. 

 

MCL 211.27a provides that a property’s TV is the lesser of the property’s SEV or 

capped TV, and a property’s capped TV is, absent a transfer of ownership, determined 

mathematically by taking into consideration the prior tax year’s TV, physical losses to 

the property, the lesser of the rate of inflation or 5%, and physical additions to the 

property, including omitted property (i.e., property not previously assessed). 

 

SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE 

 

A. Petitioner’s Evidence 

 

Petitioner’s contentions of TCV, SEV and TV: 

 

Parcel Number: 4708-17-100-013 

Year

TCV

SEV

TV

2024

$264,000

$132,000

$66,000

2025

unknown10

 

 

3 MCL 205.737(3); see also Kern v Pontiac Twp, 93 Mich App 612, 620; 287 NW2d 603 (1979). 

4 Michigan Const 1963, art IX, sec 3. 

5 MCL 211.27(1). 

6 CAF Investment Co v State Tax Comm, 392 Mich 442, 450; 221 NW2d 588 (1974). 

7 See Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp v City of Warren, 193 Mich App 348; 483 NW2d 416 (1992). 

8 Id. at 356. 

9 See Safran Printing Co v Detroit, 88 Mich App 376; 276 NW2d 602 (1979). 

10 At the hearing, Petitioner was asked to provide contentions of value for tax year 2025 but did not have 

any to offer.

Page 3

MTT Docket No. 24-003536 

Page 3 of 8 

 

The exhibits offered by Petitioner may be viewed on line 1 of the docket maintained in 

this case.11 No exhibits were excluded from evidence. 

 

Based on the pleadings, admitted exhibits, and sworn testimony, Petitioner contends 

that Respondent made errors in valuing their property in the past. Petitioner and his 

wife built a house in 1996 to blueprint specifications, with no alterations, and everything 

was verified by Respondent’s assessor at the time. In 1998, the

Page 4

MTT

Page 5

MTT

Page 6

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

Board of Trustees 

William J. Fountain, Supervisor 

Matthew J. Germane, Trustee 

Larry N. Ciofu, Clerk 

Summer L. McMullen, Trustee 

Kathleen A. Horning, Treasurer 

Denise M. O'Connell, Trustee 

Joseph M. Petrucci, Trustee 

RECEIVED 

AUG 2 6 7025 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

August 19, 2025 

Michigan Tax Tribunal - Chief Clerk 

PO Box 30232 

Lansing, Michigan 48909 

RE: Evidentiary Information 

- Docket 24-003536 

Dear Clerk, 

Enclosed please find the evidentiary information for the above referenced docket, as ell 

as the proof of service upon the Petitioner. 

Please let 

me know if you need any additional information. 

anda Carrigan, AsSessor 

Hartland Township 

Encl 

Cc: Petitioner Lawrence Shaheen

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND ECONOMIC GROWTH 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

Lawrence A Shaheen, 

Petitioner, 

MTT Docket No. 

_24-003536 

Parcel Nos. 4708-32-400-010 

¥ 

Hartland Township, 

Respondent, 

Lawrence A Shaheen 

Amanda Carrigan, Assessor 

3796 Cullen Rd 

Hartland Township 

Howell, MI 48855 

2655 Clark Road 

(231) 866-0664 

Hartland, MI 48353 

troy@biddixfamily.com 

(810) 632-7498 

acarrigan@hartlandtwp.com 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

On this 

_19th _ day of August 2025, I served a copy of Respondent, Hartland Township's 

Evidentiary Information, along with a copy of this Proof of Service, upon Lawrence A Shaheen, 

Petitioner — 3796 Cullen Rd., Howell, MI 48855, by certified mail to petitioner and the State of 

Michigan, Michigan Tax Tribunal as requested. 

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

Date: 

August 

_19 

,2025

Page 3

Docket 24-003536 

Respondents Valuation Information 

Summary of Valuation History 

The subject property was built in 1996. From the records that we can locate, it appears that the 

house was assessed initially with a 1,914sq ft single family residential home, and 11.05 acres of 

land. 

The property continued to be assessed with those areas until 2010, when the square footage was 

adjusted to 1,934 square feet. We do not have any records that indicate why the square footage 

was altered for 2010. 

Due to the market crash in 2008, the property experienced a significant drop in value from 2009 

through 2011, a total of 47,800 loss in assessed value over that three-year span. This ultimately 

impacted the taxable value for 2010 and 2011 as well, as the assessed value had fallen below the 

capped value. 

In 2012 the property was inspected by then assessor 

Jim Heaslip. At that time the square footage 

was changed to 1,871 sq ft. 

In this same year, the assessed value began to increase at a rate 

greater than the taxable value again. 

In 2013 the square footage was changed to 1,854 square feet, again we have no records to indicate 

why. 

in 2014, the land acreage was corrected from 11.05 acres to 10.05 acres. 

The square footage and acreage remained the same until the 2023 July meeting of the Board of 

Review, who corrected the square footage to 1,685 sq feet, according to the notes from Assessor 

Jim Heaslip, he reviewed the plans and sketch and made the corrections. At this meeting, the 

Board of Review corrected the 2022 & 2023 square footages. 

Petitioner’s contention is that the property was over-valued from the initial assessment due to the 

extra acreage and square footage. 

| have verified that the information on the record card appears 

to be accurate as of this time, however, there is no facet for our office to change anything back 

to 

the date that the initial errors took place. 

Enclosed are the Assessment Record Cards as well as the ECF & Land Valuation studies for the 

2024 & 2025 tax year, Respondents Exhibit 1 & 2. 

Also enclosed are Sales Comparison Analysis for both the 2024 & 2025 tax years.

Page 4

MTT Docket 24-003536 

Respondent's Exhibit 

Shaheen vs Hartland Township 

Valuation History 

Assessed Value 

Taxable Value 

Acres 

Sq Footage 

1999 

117,400 

104,149 

2000 

121,600 

106,127 

11.05 

1,914 

2001 

132,000 

109,523 

11.05 

1,914 

2002 

136,300 

113,027 

11.05 

1,914 

2003 

143,600 

114,722 

11.05 

1,914 

2004 

: 

153,600 

117,360 

11.05 

1,914 

2005 

153,600 

120,059 

11.05 

1,914 

2006 

153,600 

124,020 

11.05 

1,914 

2007 

153,600 

128,608 

11.05 

1,914 

2008 

153,100 

131,565 

11.05 

1,914 

2009 

136,900 

136,900 

11.05 

1,914 

2010 

115,100 

115,100 

11.05 

1,934 

2011 

105,300 

105,300 

11.05 

1,934 

2012 

122,000 

107,494 

11.05 

1,871 

| *lim Inspected 7/17/12 

2013 

123,900 

110,073 

11.05 

1,854 

2014 

134,600 

111,834 

10.05 

1,854 

2015 

144,800 

113,623 

10.05 

1,854 

2016 

158,800 

113,963 

10.05 

1,854

Page 5

4708

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

Lawrence A Shaheen,

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v

MTT Docket No.: 24-003536

Township Of Hartland, 

Respondent.

NOTICE OF TELEPHONE HEARING

The Tribunal has scheduled a telephone hearing to be conducted as follows. Hearings are 

generally 30 minutes in length. 

HEARING DATE:

September 10, 2025 

HEARING TIME:

3:00 PM EST

JOIN BY PHONE:

1-248-509-0316

ACCESS CODE:

731891219 

 

This hearing will be held by telephone conference call with the Judge as the host. In order to join 

the hearing, call the phone number listed above at least 5 minutes prior to the hearing time. You 

will then be required to input the access code, followed by # to connect. The Tribunal judge will call 

in and join by phone at the hearing time. Failure to timely call in may result in the placement of a 

party or parties in default.

This is an important legal document. Please have someone translate the document.

Este es un documento legal importante. Por favor, haga traducir este documento.

এটি একটি গুরুত্বপূর্ণ আইনি দলিল, অনুগ্রহ করে কেউ দলিলটিকে অনুবাদ করুন।

.ةقيثولا مجرتت صخش كيدل ىجري ةماه ةينوناق ةقيثو وه اذه

Ito ay isang mahalagang legal na dokumento. Mangyari lamang na magkaroon ng isang tao isalin ang 

dokumento.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-003536

Page 2 of 13

HEARING INFORMATION – PLEASE READ IMMEDIATELY

GENERAL INFORMATION: An impartial hearing will be conducted in accordance with the Michigan Tax 

Tribunal Rules (R 792.10201-R 792.10297) and the Michigan Administrative Procedures Act, MCL 24.201 et 

seq. The Michigan Rules of Evidence and the Michigan Court Rules may be applicable. Parties are expected 

to exercise proper respect and courtesy toward other parties, witnesses, and administrative law judges, which 

includes attending the hearing on time, silencing cell phones, and choosing a quiet, private location to 

participate in the hearing to limit distractions and ensure minimal background noise. The hearing may be 

recorded for notetaking purposes, but the recording is not a formal record, unless otherwise provided for by the 

Tribunal.

REPRESENTATION: You may have an attorney or anyone else of your choice represent you at the hearing. 

The Tribunal does not recommend or appoint representatives for you and will not pay for your representative.

WITNESSES: You may have anyone join you at the hearing to speak in support of your case. However, the 

time to present your case is limited and additional time may not be provided to accommodate witness 

testimony.

DOCUMENTATION: Parties are required to submit all documents in support of their contentions to both the 

Tribunal and the opposing party at least 21 days before the hearing date even if the documents were 

previously submitted to the local Board of Review or the Michigan Department of Treasury. If the 

documents are not timely submitted to both the Tribunal and the opposing party, the documents may be 

excluded. Documents may be submitted to the Tribunal by mail or through the Tribunal’s electronic filing (e-

filing) system. Documents may be sent to the opposing party by mail or by e-mail, if the parties agree to 

submission by e-mail. If sent by mail, the documents must be sent to the opposing party or their authorized 

representative at the address identified in the petition or answer for that party or authorized representative, 

unless the party or authorized representative filed an appearance or other documentation identifying a different 

mailing address. The documents do not need to be resubmitted after the Notice of Hearing if they were 

previously submitted to the Tribunal and the opposing party in this case.

If a hearing had previously been scheduled in this case and adjourned, and the adjournment order indicates 

that the parties are precluded from submitting any further documentary evidence, no further documentary 

evidence will be accepted even if filed and exchanged as indicated above.

INCLUSION OF SUBSEQUENT TAX YEARS: Subsequent tax year assessments are automatically included 

in valuation appeals once the assessment has been established for that tax year. For purposes of 

administrative efficiency, the Tribunal considers this date April 1st. As such, the parties should submit 

documentation and be prepared to discuss subsequent tax year assessments at hearings to be

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

RECEIVED 

NOV 1 5 2024 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON 

|. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Law RENCE 

SH AREER) 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner(s) 

v 

MTT Docket No, &-1- 00353 

Tw OFHART LAD 

Respondent(s) 

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

1. 

I wish this Tribunal to reconsider 

Fop Rensom 

5p ECIFILEN 

- 

ELOW 

2. 

Good cause exists to grant reconsideration because: 

M 

y 

SP 

£4 

Fer Cuaoges On Reco AD CARD 

RD, Ne RR 

1 Tgeenmyplen. AY sar Bae 72 FoR Cr ana 

On Reco 

RR 

ARG, EA NT 

Lire y Upper PENELTYOF FORE TUREON THe PARTALA 

VEL. Horo Tam Ope DEREND Aeris T THISBEHAV 

6 Ry WiTHeoT 

AX PAY 

Janka Perce Madea Lap Le. lucioepce WERE Cred [0 Iwi Tic une. 

THEY Wain Not ADRESS Tss0Es FoR 

25 YEARS USTIL 

| fomnLas oR C 

Avoonstip MET 6: 

3. 

| ask this Tribunal to grant my request for — 

Party/Representative - Al. 

Lawkence 

SHAREEN 

[Print/type name of person signing] 

| certify that on this date 

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

opposing party or their representative. 

[[-10-24 

Sooraae MY

Page 2

Re cievED Us 

MAL 10/28] 24 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON |. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Lawrence A Shaheen, 

Petitioner, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003536 

Township Of Hartland, 

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.

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Lawrence A Shaheen, 

Petitioner, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003536 

Township Of Hartland, 

Respondent. 

ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL 

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

is appealing assessments for prior tax years and the Tribunal has no authority over 

those assessments under MCL 205.7354, as the petition was not timely filed.! Further, 

the Tribunal also has no authority over those assessments, as the facts alleged do not 

establish that the assessments were the result of a clerical error (i.e., “an error of a 

transpositional, typographical, or mathematical nature”) or a mutual mistake of fact (i.e., 

“an erroneous belief, which is shared and relied on by both parties”).? Rather, the facts 

alleged indicate a valuation dispute that does not involve the correction of a clerical 

error or mutual mistake of fact. Therefore, 

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner's assessment appeal is PARTIALLY DISMISSED. The 

appeal shall continue for the 2024 tax year(s) only. 

. 

APPEAL RIGHTS 

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

reconsideration with the

Page 4

MTT

Page 5

n

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 

Lawrence A Shaheen, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 24-003536 

 

Hartland Township, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Mark Perry 

 

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

 

On November 12, 2024, Petitioner filed a motion requesting that the Tribunal reconsider 

the Order of Partial Dismissal (order) entered in the above-captioned case on 

September 25, 2024. In the motion, Petitioner states that the Tribunal and Respondent 

have failed to specify rules for changes on the record card. Issues with the record card 

were not fixed for a long time. 

 

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

merely restating the arguments previously presented. The issues raised in the motion 

were considered by the Tribunal in the rendering of the order. The Tribunal has no 

equitable authority to grant relief not allowed by statute.1 For each tax year, a party in 

interest is required to appeal a residential assessment to the March Board of Review 

and then file the appeal with the Tribunal by July 31.2 The Tribunal also has no 

authority under MCL 211.53a because the facts alleged do not establish that the 

assessments were the result of a clerical error (i.e., “an error of a transpositional, 

typographical, or mathematical nature”) or a mutual mistake of fact (i.e., “an erroneous 

belief, which is shared and relied on by both parties”).3 Although Petitioner alleges a 

mistake, there is no indication that the mistake involved a mutual belief or a 

typographical error. Though MCL 211.53b provides July and December boards of 

review with the authority to correct qualified errors for one prior tax year, Petitioner did 

not appear before Respondent’s July or December Board of Review or appeal an action 

taken by any such board. 

 

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

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

disposition if the error was corrected.4 Therefore, 

 

 

1 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). 

2 MCL 205.735a(3), (6). 

3 See International Place Apartments – IV v Ypsilanti Township, 216 Mich App 104, 109 (1996), Ford 

Motor Company v City of Woodhaven, 475 Mich 425, 442 (2006). 

4 See MCR 2.119.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-003536 

Page 2 of 2 

 

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

 

 

 

Entered: December 4, 2024 

 

 

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 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 

NOV 1 5 2024 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON 

|. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Law RENCE 

SH AREER) 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner(s) 

v 

MTT Docket No, &-1- 00353 

Tw OFHART LAD 

Respondent(s) 

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

1. 

I wish this Tribunal to reconsider 

Fop Rensom 

5p ECIFILEN 

- 

ELOW 

2. 

Good cause exists to grant reconsideration because: 

M 

y 

SP 

£4 

Fer Cuaoges On Reco AD CARD 

RD, Ne RR 

1 Tgeenmyplen. AY sar Bae 72 FoR Cr ana 

On Reco 

RR 

ARG, EA NT 

Lire y Upper PENELTYOF FORE TUREON THe PARTALA 

VEL. Horo Tam Ope DEREND Aeris T THISBEHAV 

6 Ry WiTHeoT 

AX PAY 

Janka Perce Madea Lap Le. lucioepce WERE Cred [0 Iwi Tic une. 

THEY Wain Not ADRESS Tss0Es FoR 

25 YEARS USTIL 

| fomnLas oR C 

Avoonstip MET 6: 

3. 

| ask this Tribunal to grant my request for — 

Party/Representative - Al. 

Lawkence 

SHAREEN 

[Print/type name of person signing] 

| certify that on this date 

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

opposing party or their representative. 

[[-10-24 

Sooraae MY

Page 2

Re cievED Us 

MAL 10/28] 24 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON |. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Lawrence A Shaheen, 

Petitioner, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003536 

Township Of Hartland, 

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.

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Lawrence A Shaheen, 

Petitioner, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION 

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003536 

Township Of Hartland, 

Respondent. 

ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL 

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

is appealing assessments for prior tax years and the Tribunal has no authority over 

those assessments under MCL 205.7354, as the petition was not timely filed.! Further, 

the Tribunal also has no authority over those assessments, as the facts alleged do not 

establish that the assessments were the result of a clerical error (i.e., “an error of a 

transpositional, typographical, or mathematical nature”) or a mutual mistake of fact (i.e., 

“an erroneous belief, which is shared and relied on by both parties”).? Rather, the facts 

alleged indicate a valuation dispute that does not involve the correction of a clerical 

error or mutual mistake of fact. Therefore, 

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner's assessment appeal is PARTIALLY DISMISSED. The 

appeal shall continue for the 2024 tax year(s) only. 

. 

APPEAL RIGHTS 

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

reconsideration with the

Page 4

MTT

Page 5

n

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

Board of Trustees 

William J. Fountain, Supervisor 

Matthew J. Germane, Trustee 

Larry N. Ciofu, Clerk 

Summer L. McMullen, Trustee 

Kathleen A. Horning, Treasurer 

Denise M. O'Connell, Trustee 

Joseph M. Petrucci, Trustee 

RECEIVED 

OCT 15 2024 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

October 10, 2024 

Michigan Tax Tribunal 

PO Box 30232 

Lansing, Michigan 48909 

RE: Answer, Docket 24-003536-TT 

Dear Chief Clerk, 

Enclosed please find the answer and supporting documentation for the above referenced docket. 

u require any additional information. 

nda 

Carrigan, Assesso 

artland Township 

Cc: Petitioner, File

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON 1. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL ANSWER FORM 

VALUATION / EXEMPTION / CLASSIFICATION APPEAL 

MTT DOCKET NO. 24-003536-TT 

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact Information 

First Name: 

ML: 

Last Name/Company Name/Unit of Government: 

Hartland Township 

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

County:y 

» 

2655 Clark Rd 

Livingston 

Gity or Town: 

State: 

ZIP Code: 

Hartland 

MI 

148353 

Telephone Number: 

Fax Number: 

810 632-7498 

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

acarrigan@hartlandiwp.com 

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

First Name: 

. 

M.L: 

Last Name: 

Amanda 

Carrigan 

"mm 

Hartland Township 

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

2655 Clark Rd 

City or Town: 

State: 

ZIP Code: 

Hartland 

MI 

48353 

Telephone Number: 

Fax Number: 

810 632-7498 

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

acarrigan@hartlandtwp.com 

Section 3: Subject Property information 

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

Yes 

[| No 

Are the parcels listed by Petitioner contiguous or adjoining? 

if not, list which parcels adjoin one another,

Page 3

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 

Petitioner appealed to the 2024 March Board of Review, however, the Board 

determined the property is currently assessed at 50% of Market Value. 

Our office met with Petitioner multiple times in the 2023 tax year regarding issues that 

he had with the valuation of his property, dating back to when the house was built. After 

researching the history of the property and the records on hand, there was a correction 

made to the square footage of the house and the land valuation for the 2022, 2023 tax 

years at the 2023 July meeting of the Board of Review. 

That correction moved forward 

as well for the 2024 tax year. As such, Hartland Township believes that the property is 

currently assessed at 50% of market value. 

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)? [A Yes 

O No 

if yes, check which BOR Petitioner attended: 

March 

[I] July 

[| December 

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

Od No 

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

If the July or December BOR revised the assessment(s} atissue, did it have authority? [mn] Yes 

[| 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? [] Yes 

No 

if yes, explain 

Is Petitioner appealing from a State Tax Commission Order? 

[} Yes 

[No 

if so, what is the issue date?

Page 4

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

MARLON 

|. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR 

Did Petitioner request a Poverty Exemption at a BOR? O Yes 

No 

If Yes, check which BOR Petitioner attended: Od March 

0 

July 

Oa December 

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

IF PETITIONER IS APPEALING THE DENIAL OF AN EXEMPTION 

OTHER THAN POVERTY, PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE, OR QUALIFIED AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTIONS 

Did Petitioner request the exemption ata BOR? O Yes 

If Yes, check which BOR Petitioner attended: a March 

O July 

[| December 

Tax Year(s) denied: 

List the date the exemption was denied: 

What statutory section did Petitioner request the subject property be exempt? 

IF PETITIONER IS APPEALING THE CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY 

What do you believe the classification should be: 

Real 

Personal 

(check one) 

O 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover

Page 5

L

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

Lawrence A Shaheen,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003536

Township Of Hartland,

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. 24-003536

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: October 24, 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

Lawrence A Shaheen

3796 Cullen Road

Howell , MI 48855

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

Lawrence A Shaheen,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003536

Township Of Hartland,

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

Page 5

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

Lawrence A Shaheen,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v

 

MTT Docket No. 24-003536

Township Of Hartland,

Respondent.

ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL

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

is appealing assessments for prior tax years and the Tribunal has no authority over 

those assessments under MCL 205.735a, as the petition was not timely filed.1 Further, 

the Tribunal also has no authority over those assessments, as the facts alleged do not 

establish that the assessments were the result of a clerical error (i.e., “an error of a 

transpositional, typographical, or mathematical nature”) or a mutual mistake of fact (i.e., 

“an erroneous belief, which is shared and relied on by both parties”).2 Rather, the facts 

alleged indicate a valuation dispute that does not involve the correction of a clerical 

error or mutual mistake of fact. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s assessment appeal is PARTIALLY DISMISSED. The 

appeal shall continue for the 2024 tax year(s) only.

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 

1 See Electronic Data Systems Corporation v Township of Flint, 253 Mich App 538 (2002). 

2 See International Place Apartments – IV v Ypsilanti Township, 216 Mich App 104, 109 (1996), Ford 

Motor Company v City of Woodhaven, 475 Mich 425, 442 (2006).

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-003536

Page 2 of 5

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. 

By:___________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: September 25, 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 provided by those parties, attorneys, or authorized 

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

Page 3

Lawrence A Shaheen

3796 Cullen Road

Howell , MI 48855

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

Lawrence A Shaheen,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v

 

MTT Docket No. 24-003536

Township Of Hartland,

Respondent.

ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL

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

is appealing assessments for prior tax years and the Tribunal has no authority over 

those assessments under MCL 205.735a, as the petition was not timely filed.3 Further, 

the Tribunal also has no authority over those

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

RECEIVED 

JUN 14 2024 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL SQ 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

ND 

2 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON |. 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 submit a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal 

(e.g. Board of Review Decision or Notice of Uncapping) with this Small Claims Petition, if applicable. If you do not 

submit this document, you may be held in default. 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information 

First T° au) IN Er C 

"A 

Last Nal TREE 

Mailing “SET P.O. Box or Rurat Route) 

AME 

Cotten 

BD. 

HOWELL 

IH Fess 

70% 224 329 

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 

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? 

parcelsareyou | [] ves 

[] Nor 

appealing? 

*If yes, use a multiple parcel form for information regarding any contiguous parcels. 

*If no, you must file separate appeals for each non-contiguous or non-adjoining parcel or you will be defaulted.

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 an that apply) 

i True Cash and Taxable Value 

[J Poverty Exemption 

[1] Taxable Value Only (calculation) 

OJ pisabled Veterans Exemption 

a Uncapping of Taxable Value 

[3 Eligible Manufacturing Personal Property (ESA) 

[J Exemption from Taxation (other than the denial of a 

[O Ciassification 

Principal Residence or Qualified Agricultural Exemption) 

Section 5: Explain the Reason for this Appeal 

<EE ATTACHED 

Section 6: Jurisdictional Issues 

Year(s) you are appealing: 

19, To 

D RES EO T 

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

[mn] No 

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

8 March 

[[] wuly 

[] December 

if No, check the applicable reason(s): 

[Hl] Not required to attend 

Assessment Change Notice was not received by Petitioner 

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

[1 Appealing within 35 days of State Tax Commission Order 

Appealing within 35 days of receipt of Notice of Uncapping

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Section 7: Valuation Information suse the multiple parcel form for additional, contiguous parcels, 

Parcel Identification Number: 

4708 

~ I 

. 

| 00 _ la) 

| 2 

Classification of Property: 

Real 

Personal 

(check one) 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

(check one) 

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

250, 60d 

136, 24 

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

26H, 00D 

Muitiply the True Cash Value by .5 and enter here. This is your contentién of Assessed Value. 

137, 000 

i you believe the Taxable Value differs from your contention of A 

4 Value, enter your contention of Taxable Value. 

Section 8: Classification Information sony the Mi Dep't of Treasury may appeal this issue to the Tribunal 

Parcel identification Number: 

470 3 

7 _ 100 -0 

f 2 

Current Classification of Property as established by Board of Review: 

Real 

Personal 

(check one) 

Current Taxable Value as established by the BOR: 

§ 

7 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

(check one) 

What do you believe is the praperty’s classification? 

Real 

Persanal 

{check one) 

[J] 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

"Developmental 

Utility 

(check one) 

|fimproved property, how is the property currgptly being used? 

ifimproved property, for what use was the proj E51DE SEN A L 

| Aa p RO V E B 

RESTNEOTIAL IMPROVED

Page 4

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

Page 5

SeeT

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

Lawrence A Shaheen,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003536

Township Of Hartland,

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: September 25, 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

Lawrence A Shaheen

3796 Cullen Road

Howell , MI 48855

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

Lawrence A Shaheen,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 24-003536

Township Of Hartland,

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: September 25, 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 

JUN 14 2024 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL SQ 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

ND 

2 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON |. 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 submit a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal 

(e.g. Board of Review Decision or Notice of Uncapping) with this Small Claims Petition, if applicable. If you do not 

submit this document, you may be held in default. 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information 

First T° au) IN Er C 

"A 

Last Nal TREE 

Mailing “SET P.O. Box or Rurat Route) 

AME 

Cotten 

BD. 

HOWELL 

IH Fess 

70% 224 329 

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 

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? 

parcelsareyou | [] ves 

[] Nor 

appealing? 

*If yes, use a multiple parcel form for information regarding any contiguous parcels. 

*If no, you must file separate appeals for each non-contiguous or non-adjoining parcel or you will be defaulted.

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 an that apply) 

i True Cash and Taxable Value 

[J Poverty Exemption 

[1] Taxable Value Only (calculation) 

OJ pisabled Veterans Exemption 

a Uncapping of Taxable Value 

[3 Eligible Manufacturing Personal Property (ESA) 

[J Exemption from Taxation (other than the denial of a 

[O Ciassification 

Principal Residence or Qualified Agricultural Exemption) 

Section 5: Explain the Reason for this Appeal 

<EE ATTACHED 

Section 6: Jurisdictional Issues 

Year(s) you are appealing: 

19, To 

D RES EO T 

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

[mn] No 

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

8 March 

[[] wuly 

[] December 

if No, check the applicable reason(s): 

[Hl] Not required to attend 

Assessment Change Notice was not received by Petitioner 

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

[1 Appealing within 35 days of State Tax Commission Order 

Appealing within 35 days of receipt of Notice of Uncapping

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Section 7: Valuation Information suse the multiple parcel form for additional, contiguous parcels, 

Parcel Identification Number: 

4708 

~ I 

. 

| 00 _ la) 

| 2 

Classification of Property: 

Real 

Personal 

(check one) 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

(check one) 

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

250, 60d 

136, 24 

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

26H, 00D 

Muitiply the True Cash Value by .5 and enter here. This is your contentién of Assessed Value. 

137, 000 

i you believe the Taxable Value differs from your contention of A 

4 Value, enter your contention of Taxable Value. 

Section 8: Classification Information sony the Mi Dep't of Treasury may appeal this issue to the Tribunal 

Parcel identification Number: 

470 3 

7 _ 100 -0 

f 2 

Current Classification of Property as established by Board of Review: 

Real 

Personal 

(check one) 

Current Taxable Value as established by the BOR: 

§ 

7 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

Industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

Developmental 

Utility 

(check one) 

What do you believe is the praperty’s classification? 

Real 

Persanal 

{check one) 

[J] 

Agricultural 

Commercial 

industrial 

Residential 

Timber-Cutover 

"Developmental 

Utility 

(check one) 

|fimproved property, how is the property currgptly being used? 

ifimproved property, for what use was the proj E51DE SEN A L 

| Aa p RO V E B 

RESTNEOTIAL IMPROVED

Page 4

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

Page 5

SeeT

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.