Maplewood Office Park LLC, Petitioner Vs. Township Of Bloomfield, 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 

Maplewood Office Park LLC, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002852 

 

Bloomfield Township, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Marcus L. Abood 

 

 

ORDER GRANTING JOINT STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

The Tribunal has reviewed the Stipulation and finds that it comports with the mandates 

of State law.1 As a result, the Tribunal shall enter the parties’ Stipulation. Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that the Joint Stipulation for Entry of Consent Judgment including all 

attachments, terms and conditions is GRANTED and ADOPTED, unless otherwise 

indicated. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the officer charged with maintaining the assessment 

rolls for the tax years at issue shall correct or cause the assessment rolls to be 

corrected to reflect the property’s true cash and taxable values as provided in this 

Consent Judgment within 20 days of the entry of the Consent Judgment.2 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the officer charged with collecting or refunding the 

affected taxes shall collect taxes and any applicable interest or issue a refund as 

required by the Consent Judgment within 28 days of the entry of the Consent 

Judgment. If a refund is warranted, it shall, unless otherwise indicated, include a 

proportionate share of any property tax administration fees paid and of penalty and 

interest paid on delinquent taxes. The refund shall also, unless otherwise indicated, 

separately indicate the amount of the taxes, fees, penalties, and interest being 

refunded. A sum determined by the Tribunal to have been unlawfully paid shall, unless 

otherwise indicated, bear interest from the date of payment to the date of judgment and 

the judgment shall bear interest to the date of its payment. A sum determined by the 

Tribunal to have been underpaid shall not bear interest for any time period prior to 28 

days after the issuance of this Consent Judgment. Pursuant to MCL 205.737, interest 

shall accrue (i) after December 31, 2013, through June 30, 2016, at the rate of 4.25%, 

(ii) after June 30, 2016, through December 31, 2016, at the rate of 4.40%, (iii) after 

December 31, 2016, through June 30, 2017, at the rate of 4.50%, (iv) after June 30, 

 

1 See MCL 211.27a. 

2 See MCL 205.755.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-002852 

Page 2 of 2 

 

2017, through December 31, 2017, at the rate of 4.70%, (v) after December 31, 2017, 

through June 30, 2018, at the rate of 5.15%, (vi) after June 30, 2018, through December 

31, 2018, at the rate of 5.41%, (vii) after December 31, 2018, through June 30, 2019, at 

the rate of 5.9%, (viii) after June 30, 2019, through December 31, 2019, at the rate of 

6.39%, (ix) after December 31, 2019, through June 30, 2020, at the rate of 6.40%, (x) 

after June 30 2020, through December 31, 2020, at the rate of 5.63%, (xi) after 

December 31, 2020, through June 30, 2022, at the rate of 4.25%, (xii) after June 30, 

2022, through December 31, 2022, at the rate of 4.27%, (xiii) after December 31, 2022, 

through June 30, 2023, at the rate of 5.65%, (xiv) after June 30, 2023, through 

December 31, 2023, at the rate of 8.25%, (xv) after December 31, 2023, through June 

30, 2024, at the rate of 9.30%, (xvi) after June 30, 2024, through December 31, 2024, at 

the rate of 9.50%, (xvii) after December 31, 2024, through June 30, 2025, at the rate of 

9.47%, (xviii) after June 30, 2025, through December 31, 2025, at the rate of 8.66%, 

and (xix) after December 31, 2025, through June 30, 2026, at a rate of 8.48%. 

 

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

 

See docket look up for a copy of stipulation and for any possible refund paragraph. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By

 

Entered: February 24, 2026 

am 

 

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 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Maplewood Office Park LLC, 

 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

vs. 

 

Charter Township of Bloomfield, 

 

 

 

Respondent. 

 

 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002852 

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

BRIAN NAJOR 

Representative for Petitioner 

600 N. Old Woodward, Suite 100 

Birmingham, MI 48009 

(248) 731-3089 

LAURA M. HALLAHAN (P42101) 

SETH A. O’LOUGHLIN (P80257) 

HALLAHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 

Attorneys for Respondent 

1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302 

(248) 731-3089 

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

1. 

The case is pending in the __X__ Entire Tribunal ___ Small Claims Division. 

 

2. 

Property Parcel No: C-19-28-351-039 

 

3. 

The 2025 values for the property identified above as established by Respondent’s Board 

of Review are: 

(TCV=true cash value, AV=assessed value, TV=taxable value) 

Year 

Original TCV 

Original AV 

Original TV 

2025 

$2,240,300 

$1,120,150 

$1,120,150 

 

4. 

The 2025 values for the property identified above as stipulated by the parties for 

settlement purposes are: 

(TCV=true cash value, SEV=state equalized value, TV=taxable value) 

Year 

 Revised TCV 

Revised SEV 

Revised TV 

2025 

$417,470 

$208,735 

$208,735 

 

5. 

If stipulation addresses tax years other than the tax year originally appealed or tax years 

added through motions to amend that have been granted by the Tribunal, list the separate 

facts upon which the parties rely to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over those tax year or

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-002852 

Stipulation for Entry of Consent Judgment, Page 2 of 2 

 

years (attach additional page if necessary): 

____________________________________________________ 

 

6. 

List separately any special terms or conditions being proposed by the parties that would 

affect the execution of this Consent Judgment including, but not limited to, the joint 

payment of the refund, the waiver of interest, etc. (attach additional page if necessary): 

 

The parties agree that the stipulation regarding the subject property’s assessed and 

taxable values is strictly for settlement purposes only, and only for the years involved, 

and for no other purpose whatsoever. 

 

Petitioner hereby waives interest attributable to the reduction for all taxing authorities. 

 

Signature of Petitioner’s Authorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: 

 //s// Brian Najor 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Brian Najor 

 

Signature of Respondent’s authorized representative: 

//s// Laura M. Hallahan 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Laura M. Hallahan

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 & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Maplewood Office Park LLC, 

 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

vs. 

 

Charter Township of Bloomfield, 

 

 

 

Respondent. 

 

 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002852 

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

BRIAN NAJOR 

Representative for Petitioner 

600 N. Old Woodward, Suite 100 

Birmingham, MI 48009 

(248) 731-3089 

LAURA M. HALLAHAN (P42101) 

SETH A. O’LOUGHLIN (P80257) 

HALLAHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 

Attorneys for Respondent 

1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302 

(248) 731-3089 

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT 

 

1. 

The case is pending in the __X__ Entire Tribunal ___ Small Claims Division. 

 

2. 

Property Parcel No: C-19-28-351-039 

 

3. 

The 2025 values for the property identified above as established by Respondent’s Board 

of Review are: 

(TCV=true cash value, AV=assessed value, TV=taxable value) 

Year 

Original TCV 

Original AV 

Original TV 

2025 

$2,240,300 

$1,120,150 

$1,120,150 

 

4. 

The 2025 values for the property identified above as stipulated by the parties for 

settlement purposes are: 

(TCV=true cash value, SEV=state equalized value, TV=taxable value) 

Year 

 Revised TCV 

Revised SEV 

Revised TV 

2025 

$417,470 

$208,735 

$208,735 

 

5. 

If stipulation addresses tax years other than the tax year originally appealed or tax years 

added through motions to amend that have been granted by the Tribunal, list the separate 

facts upon which the parties rely to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over those tax year or

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-002852 

Stipulation for Entry of Consent Judgment, Page 2 of 2 

 

years (attach additional page if necessary): 

____________________________________________________ 

 

6. 

List separately any special terms or conditions being proposed by the parties that would 

affect the execution of this Consent Judgment including, but not limited to, the joint 

payment of the refund, the waiver of interest, etc. (attach additional page if necessary): 

 

The parties agree that the stipulation regarding the subject property’s assessed and 

taxable values is strictly for settlement purposes only, and only for the years involved, 

and for no other purpose whatsoever. 

 

Petitioner hereby waives interest attributable to the reduction for all taxing authorities. 

 

Signature of Petitioner’s Authorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: 

 //s// Brian Najor 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Brian Najor 

 

Signature of Respondent’s authorized representative: 

//s// Laura M. Hallahan 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Laura M. Hallahan

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

NOTICE OF DECEMBER 16 - 30, 2026 PREHEARING GENERAL CALL AND 

ORDER OF PROCEDURE

Maplewood Office Park LLC,

Petitioner,

v

 

 

Township Of Bloomfield,

Respondent.

 MTT Docket No. 25-002852

Please be advised that 25-002852 has been placed on a two-week Prehearing General 

Call commencing December 16, 2026. Unless ordered otherwise, parties will be 

notified at least 28 days before they are scheduled to appear. Scheduling will not 

necessarily occur in the order in which the cases are listed below.

Parties are required to submit a valuation disclosure or written notification that no 

valuation disclosure is required by the dates indicated herein. A “valuation disclosure” 

is defined as documentary or other tangible evidence in a property tax proceeding that a 

party relies upon in support of the party’s contention as to the true cash value of the 

subject property or any portion thereof and contains the party’s value conclusion and 

data, valuation methodology, analysis or reasoning. See TTR 203 and TTR 241.

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

public records and will appear for public viewing on the Tribunal’s Tax Docket 

Lookup. If a user wishes to file a document for consideration by the Tribunal and 

prevent its publication on the Tax Docket Lookup, the user MUST file a Motion for 

Protective Order under MCR 2.302(C)(8). If a Protective Order is issued, documents 

covered by the order will not be published. Documents filed prior to the issuance of a 

Protective Order will be published.

In accordance with MCR 1.109(D)(9) and TTR 209, the responsibility for excluding or 

redacting personal identifying information (PII) from all documents filed with or offered to 

the Tribunal rests solely with the parties and their attorneys. The Tribunal is not 

responsible for or required to review, redact, or screen documents at the time of filing 

for PII whether filed electronically or on paper. A party, representative, or interested 

person (i.e. third party not part of an appeal) may request that the Tribunal redact PII 

contained in a previously filed document by submitting a Request for Redactions. The 

Request for Redactions form is available on the Entire Tribunal and Small Claims pages 

of the Tribunal’s website. 

Please refer to the Tribunal’s FAQs and Glossary of Terms pages on the Tribunal’s 

website for more information.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-002852

Page 2 of 3

IT IS ORDERED that the parties shall:

a. If no valuation disclosure is required, notify the Tribunal and the opposing parties 

in writing within 21 days of entry of this order that no valuation disclosure is being 

filed. The notice shall indicate the reason or reasons why no valuation disclosure 

is required (i.e., exemption claim, etc.).

b. If a valuation disclosure is required, file and exchange their valuation disclosures 

by August 19, 2026. Valuation disclosures will not be admitted into evidence 

unless disclosed and furnished in accordance with this order (even though 

admissible) except upon a finding of good cause by the Tribunal.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall file and exchange their Prehearing 

Statements by August 19, 2026. Witnesses, with the exception of rebuttal witnesses, 

will not be allowed to testify unless disclosed in the Prehearing Statement and the 

Prehearing Statement is furnished in accordance with this order except upon a finding 

of good cause by the Tribunal. Failure to file the Prehearing Statement may result in 

holding a party or parties in default. See TTR 237. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that “Pre-Valuation Disclosure” discovery is CLOSED on 

August 19, 2026, which means all discovery has been requested, all Motions to Compel 

have been filed, and all requested or ordered discovery has been exchanged by that 

date. Discovery relative to the valuation disclosure prepared for purposes of litigating 

this case or the valuation expert that prepared that valuation disclosure is not permitted 

during “Pre-Valuation Disclosure” discovery.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that “Post-Valuation Disclosure” discovery is CLOSED on 

December 16, 2026, which means all discovery has been requested, all Motions to 

Compel have been filed, and all requested or ordered discovery has been exchanged 

by that date. “Post-Valuation Disclosure” discovery is limited to the opposing party’s 

valuation disclosure, the opposing party’s valuation expert, and the witnesses identified 

on the opposing party’s Prehearing Statement.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if this case is not scheduled for a date certain 

prehearing conference during the time frame indicated it may be scheduled for a date 

certain prehearing

Page 3

MTT Docket

Page 4

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

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

Maplewood Office Park LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002852

Township Of Bloomfield,

Respondent.

ORDER SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT

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

Respondent was held in default on October 15, 2025, and the default has been timely 

cured. The documents curing the default can be reviewed through the docket search 

function on the Tribunal’s website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib by inputting the docket 

number and clicking on the document link next to the line item entry for the documents. 

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the Default is SET ASIDE.

By_________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: November 6, 2025

PROOF OF SERVICE

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

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

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

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA

DIRECTOR

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

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

Maplewood Office Park LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002852

Township Of Bloomfield,

Respondent.

ORDER SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT

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

Respondent was held in default on October 15, 2025, and the default has been timely 

cured. The documents curing the default can be reviewed through the docket search 

function on the Tribunal’s website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib by inputting the docket 

number and clicking on the document link next to the line item entry for the documents. 

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the Default is SET ASIDE.

By_________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: November 6, 2025

PROOF OF SERVICE

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

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

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

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

Page 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

Maplewood Office Park LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002852

Township Of Bloomfield,

Respondent.

ORDER SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT

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

Respondent was held in default on October 15, 2025, and the default has been timely 

cured. The documents curing the default can be reviewed through the docket search 

function on the Tribunal’s website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib by inputting the docket 

number and clicking on the document link next to the line item entry for the documents. 

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the Default is SET ASIDE.

By_________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: November 6, 2025

PROOF OF SERVICE

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

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

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

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

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

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Maplewood Office Park LLC 

 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

v 

 

Township of Bloomfield, 

 

 

 

Respondent. 

 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002852 

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

Brian Najor 

Representative for Petitioner 

600 N. Old Woodward, Suite 100, 

Birmingham, MI 

(248) 731-3089 

LAURA M. HALLAHAN (P42101) 

SETH A. O’LOUGHLIN (P80257) 

HALLAHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 

Attorneys for Respondent 

1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302 

(248) 731-3089 

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

ANSWER TO PETITION 

AND 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

 

ANSWER 

 

Respondent Township of Bloomfield, by and through its attorneys, Hallahan & 

Associates, P.C., responds to the allegations made in Petitioner’s Petition as follows: 

1. 

Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 1 as to the parcel number, address, 

classification, County, and school district.. 

 

2. 

Respondent admits that no Board of Review protest was made. 

 

3. 

Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 3. 

 

4. 

Respondent lacks the information necessary to respond to the allegations in Paragraph 4 

and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

 

5. 

Respondent lacks the information necessary to respond to the allegations in Paragraph 5 

and leaves Petitioner to its proofs.

Page 2

Entire Tribunal Property Tax Answer 

Page 2 of 5 

 

 

6. 

Respondent acknowledges Petitioner’s beliefs as to the issues in this appeal, but denies 

that those issues have merit and also denies that Petitioner is entitled to any relief. 

 

7. 

Respondent admits that the 2025 tax year is under appeal by Petitioner but denies any 

issue with the 2025 tax year’s assessment. 

 

8. 

The values for the property identified above as established by Respondent’s Board of 

Review are: 

 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

Assessed Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

$2,240,300 

$1,120,150 

$1,120,150 

 

9. 

Respondent contends that the values for the property identified above are: 

 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

$2,240,300 

$1,120,150 

$1,120,150 

 

10. 

The values in dispute for the property identified above are: 

 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

$0 

$0 

$0 

 

11. 

Petitioner is not entitled to the relief requested in Paragraph 11, including all 

subparagraphs, for the reason that Petitioner’s amounts do not reflect the accurate 

valuations for this property. Furthermore, the assessed, state equalized and/or taxable 

values do not exceed permitted amounts, do not exceed the percentage for true cash value 

permitted by law, were correctly determined and are based upon correct application of 

proper principals, and the values and Respondent’s mode of assessment are non-

discriminatory and constitutional. 

 

WHEREFORE, Respondent Township of Bloomfield requests the Tribunal dismiss the 

Petition, affirm Respondent’s assessed and taxable values, subject to county and state 

equalization, and award Respondent its costs and attorney fees.

Page 3

Entire Tribunal Property Tax Answer 

Page 3 of 5 

 

HALLAHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 

 

/s/ Seth A. O’Loughlin_________________ 

LAURA M. HALLAHAN (P42101) 

SETH A. O’LOUGHLIN (P80257) 

Attorneys for Respondent 

1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302 

Dated: October 16, 2025 

(248) 731-3089 

 

 

 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

 

Respondent Township of Bloomfield asserts the following affirmative defenses: 

1. 

Petitioner fails to allege specific and sufficient facts to set forth a cause of action 

against Respondent and to support its claim for relief. 

2. 

The Tribunal is charged with finding a property’s true cash value to determine the 

property’s lawful assessment. Alhi Development Co v Orion Twp, 110 Mich App 764, 767 

(1981). 

3. 

Petitioner has the burden of establishing the property’s true cash value. See 

MCL 205.737(3) and Kern v Pontiac Twp, 93 Mich App 612 (1974). 

4. 

Petitioner has failed to allege specific and sufficient facts to establish fraud, error 

of law, discrimination, application of wrong principles, or illegality on the part of Respondent or 

its agents. 

5. 

Petitioner has failed to allege that the mode and method of assessing the subject 

property fails to conform to the mode and method applied in the case of all other properties in 

Respondent’s taxing unit for the year in question. 

6. 

Petitioner has failed to show that any factor other than fifty percent (50%) was 

applied to the true cash value of Petitioner’s property, as well as all others, to arrive at the

Page 4

Entire Tribunal Property Tax Answer 

Page 4 of 5 

 

respective assessments appearing on the roll, and also fails to allege specific and sufficient facts 

to support its allegations that the property’s taxable value is improper. 

7. 

Petitioner asks the Tribunal to grant it preference by application of a self-chosen 

method

Page 5

E

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

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

Entire Tribunal Case Information Sheet - Respondent

MOAHR DOCKET NO. 25-002852

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact Information

Filer Type: Local Unit of Government

Township Of Bloomfield (OAKLAND)

Local Unit of Government/First Name

M.I.

Last Name

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

City or Town

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

Telephone Number

Fax Number

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

Section 2: Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information

First Name

Laura

M.I.

M

Last Name

Hallahan

Firm Name (if any)

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

1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202

City or Town

Bloomfield Hills

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48302

Telephone Number

248-731-3087

Fax Number

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

MTT@hallahanlaw.com

Electronic Signature *Typing your name below will serve as your signature

Respondent or Authorized Attorney/Representative’s Signature: 

Laura M. Hallahan

/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

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

Maplewood Office Park LLC,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002852

Township Of Bloomfield,

Respondent.

ORDER OF DEFAULT

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

Respondent has failed to file an answer. As such, Respondent must file and serve an 

answer to the petition and file proof demonstrating service of the answer within 14 days 

of the entry of this order. See TTR 235 and 227. Tribunal rules and information on 

Entire Tribunal answers can be found on our website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib.

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Respondent 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 15, 2025

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

PROOF OF SERVICE

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

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

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

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

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

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

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

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

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

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

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-002852

Page 2 of 6

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

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

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

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

act, MCL 205.735a.” TTR 225(5)

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA

DIRECTOR

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

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

Maplewood Office Park LLC,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002852

Township Of Bloomfield,

Respondent.

ORDER OF DEFAULT

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

Respondent has failed to file an answer. As such, Respondent must file and serve an 

answer to the petition and file proof demonstrating service of the answer within 14 days 

of the entry of this order. See TTR 235 and 227. Tribunal rules and information on 

Entire Tribunal answers can be found on our website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib.

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Respondent is HELD IN DEFAULT.

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

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

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

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

By:_______________________________

Entered: October 15, 2025

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

PROOF OF SERVICE

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

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

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

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

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

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

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

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

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

Page 4

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 

SEP 08 2075 

MICHIGAN 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

TAX TRIBUNAL 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Maplewood Office Park, LLC, 

Petitioner, 

vs. 

MOAHR Docket No. 25-002852 

Charter Township of Bloomfield, 

Respondent. 

/ 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

(Property Tax Petition) 

On the date below I sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, a copy of the Petition to: 

Township Assessor 

Township Supervisor 

Bloomfield Township 

Bloomfield Township 

4200 Telegraph Rd 

4200 Telegraph Rd 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48303-0489 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48303-0489 

On the date below I sent by first class mail a copy of the Petition to: 

Equalization Director 

County Clerk 

Oakland County 

Oakland County 

250 Elizabeth Lake Rd, Ste 1000W 

1200 N. Telegraph Rd, Bldg 12E 

Pontiac, MI 48341 

Pontiac, MI 48341 

Secretary, Board of Education 

State Treasurer 

Birmingham Public Schools 

Department of Treasury 

31301 Evergreen Rd 

430 W. Allegan Street 

Beverly Hills, MI 48025 

Lansing, MI 48922 

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

/s/ Brian Najor

Page 2

RECET VED 

JUN 04 2995 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN Tax TRIBUNA 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

+ Maplewood Office Park, LLC, 

Petitioner, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

v 

Docket No. 25- 002852 

Charter Township of Bloomfield, 

Parcel No. 

C-19-28-351-039 

Respondent. 

/ 

NEARS 

Petitioner, by and through its representative, Brian Najor, contends: 

1. 

(XI The property that is the subject of this appeal is one real property parcel: 

Parcel Number 

| C-19-28-351-039 

Address 

None. 

Classification 

202 Comm 

| Use 

Office 

County 

Oakland 

| Sch Dist 

| Birmingham School District 

2. 

N/A. 

Ifthe assessment at issue was protested, the protest was made to Respondent’s: 

[0 March, 

[J July, 

0 December 

Board of Review. 

3. 

Respondent, identified above, assesses and collects taxes on the subject property. 

4. 

Petitioner 

is 

a taxpayer/parfy-in-interest with respect to property taxes on the subject 

property. 

5. 

The Petitioner’s principal office/legal residence address is: 

600 N. Old Woodward, Suite 

100, Birmingham, MI 48009, 

6. 

This appeal involves issues related to: 

x 

the subject property’s true cash and taxable values 

[m} 

the subject property’s taxable value only

Page 3

Petition 

10. 

11. 

The tax year at issue is 2025. 

The values! established by Respondent's Board of Review for the subject property are: 

Parcel Number 

TCV 

SEV 

TV 

C-19-28-351-039 

2,240,300 

1,120,150 

1,120,150 

Petitioner contends that the values' for the subject property are: 

Parcel Number 

TCV 

SEV 

TV 

C-19-28-351-039 

500,000 

250,000 

250,000 

The values! in dispute are. 

Parcel Number 

TCV 

SEV 

Tv 

C-19-28-351-039 

1,740,300 

870,150 

870,150 

Petitioner relies upon the following to support the relief requested: 

The 2025 values imposed on Petitioner’s property, and the taxes to be levied and collected 

thereon, are invalid and unlawful and operate as fraud upon the taxpayer for the reasons 

that: 

(a) 

The assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values exceed the amounts permitted 

by the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes; 

(b) 

The assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values are at higher percentages of true 

cash value than permissible under the Michigan Constitution and applicable 

statutes; 

(¢) 

The assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values are based upon an erroneous 

determination of the true cash value of that portion of Petitioner’s property that is 

taxable under Michigan law and are based upon the application of wrong principles; 

and 

(d) 

The assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values, and the mode of assessment 

adopted by Respondent, discriminate against Petitioner and deny Petitioner its 

constitutional rights of uniformity, equal protection and due process of law. 

Petitioner requests that the Tribunal enter an order reducing the 2025 values from those established 

by Respondent’s Board of Review to those contended by Petitioner, and order refunds attributable 

to the reductions, with interest, as provided by the Tax Tribunal Act.

Page 4

Petition 

Dated: May 30, 2025 

Filing Fee: $600 

Brian Najsr 

Representative for Petitioner 

600 N. Old Woodward, Suite 100, 

Birmingham, MI 

(248) 731-3089 

kim@najorcompanies.com

Page 5

Brian Najor 

—I

600 N. Old Woodward, Suite 100 

METROPLEX MI 480 

US POS

Birmingham, MI 48009 

A 

I 

FIRS

29 AUG 2025PM 4 L 

065890

. 

FR

i 

- 

y 

. 

Michigan Tax Tribunal 

y 

: 

of 

P.O. Box 30232 

Lansing, MI 48909 

alelfheghasp]psfongl]

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 04 275 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN Tax TRIBUNAL 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

Maplewood Office Park, LLC, 

Petitioner, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

v 

Docket No. 

25- 

Charter Township of Bloomfield, 

Parcel No. 

(C-19-28-351-039 

Respondent. 

PROPERTY TAX PETITION 

(Entire Tribunal, 2025 Tax Year) 

[[: 

Petitioner, by and through its representative, Brian Najor, contends: 

1: 

The property that is the subject of this appeal is one real property parcel: 

Parcel Number 

| C-19-28-351-039 

Address 

None. 

Classification 

202 Comm 

Use 

Office 

County 

Oakland 

| Sch Dist | Birmingham School District 

2. 

N/A. 

If the assessment at issue was protested, the protest was made to Respondent’s: 

[J March, 

[ July, 

[J December 

Board of Review. 

3. 

Respondent, identified above, assesses and collects taxes on the subject property. 

4. 

Petitioner 

is 

a taxpayet/party-in-interest with respect to property taxes on the subject 

property. 

5. 

The Petitioner’s principal office/legal residence address is: 

600 N. Old Woodward, Suite 

100, Birmingham, MI 48009. 

6. 

This appeal involves issues related to: 

x 

the subject property’s true cash and taxable values

Page 2

Petition 

10. 

11. 

Petitioner requests that the Tribunal enter an order reducing the 2025 values from those established 

by Respondent’s Board of Review to those contended by Petitioner, and order refunds attributable 

The tax year at issue is 2025. 

The values' established by Respondent’s Board of Review for the subject property ate: 

Parcel Number 

TCV 

SEV 

Tv 

C-19-28-351-039 

2,240,300 

1,120,150 

1,120,150 

Petitioner contends that the values’ for the subject property are: 

Parcel Number 

TCV 

SEV 

TV 

C-19-28-351-039 

500,000 

250,000 

250,000 

The values' in dispute are. 

Parcel Number 

TCV 

SEV 

TV 

C-19-28-351-039 

1,740,300 

870,150 

870,150 

Petitioner relies upon the following to support the relief requested: 

The 2025 values imposed on Petitioner’s property, and the taxes to be levied and collected 

thereon, are invalid and unlawful and operate as fraud upon the taxpayer for the reasons 

that: 

(a) 

The assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values exceed the amounts permitted 

by the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes; 

(b) 

The assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values are at higher percentages of true 

cash value than permissible under the Michigan Constitution and applicable 

statutes; 

(c) 

The assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values are based upon an erroneous 

determination of the true cash value of that portion of Petitioner’s property that is 

taxable under Michigan law and are based upon the application of wrong principles; 

and 

(d) 

The assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values, and the mode of assessment 

adopted by Respondent, discriminate against Petitioner and deny Petitioner its 

constitutional rights of uniformity, equal protection and due process of law. 

to the reductions, with interest, as provided by the Tax Tribunal Act.

Page 3

Petition 

Dated: May 30, 2025 

Filing Fee: $600 

Brian Ngjér 

Representative for Petitioner 

600 N. Old Woodward, Suite 100, 

Birmingham, MI 

(248) 731-3089 

kim@najorcompanies.com

Page 4

MON - 02 JUN 5:00P 

STANDARD OVERNIGHT 

[Rt 8816 5402 0368 

48933 

68 LANA 

wus GRR 

DANE 

oi 1k

Made from100%

recycled paperboard

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

Maplewood Office Park LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

v

MTT Docket No.: 25-002852

Township Of Bloomfield, 

Respondent.

NOTICE OF DOCKET NUMBER

TAKE NOTICE that an Entire Tribunal petition has been filed and the above-noted 

docket number has been assigned to that petition. This docket number shall be noted 

on the petition and the petition shall be served within 45 days of the issuance of 

this notice, as required by TTR 227 and MCL 205.735a, even if the petition was served 

when filed. A proof of service shall also be filed with the Tribunal within 45 days of the 

issuance of this notice evidencing the service of the petition. 

If you submitted a proof of service with the petition, you must still serve the petition and 

file a second proof of service including the docket number, pursuant to this notice. 

Failure to serve the petition and file a proof of service within 45 days of the issuance of 

the notice may result in the dismissal of this case.

Under TTR 235(1), “[t]he respondent shall file an answer or responsive motion within 28 

days after the date of service of the petition with noted docket number.” Failure to do so 

will result in Respondent being placed in default.

The docket number also needs to be noted on all other documents submitted in this 

case. Further, the assignment of the docket number does not mean that the Tribunal 

has authority over the petition or that the petition complies with statutory requirements 

or the Tribunal’s rules.

By: __Tribunal Clerk________

Entered: July 24, 2025

PROOF OF SERVICE

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

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

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

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

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

Page 1

RECEIVED 

JUN 04 275 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN Tax TRIBUNAL 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

Maplewood Office Park, LLC, 

Petitioner, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

v 

Docket No. 

25- 

Charter Township of Bloomfield, 

Parcel No. 

(C-19-28-351-039 

Respondent. 

PROPERTY TAX PETITION 

(Entire Tribunal, 2025 Tax Year) 

[[: 

Petitioner, by and through its representative, Brian Najor, contends: 

1: 

The property that is the subject of this appeal is one real property parcel: 

Parcel Number 

| C-19-28-351-039 

Address 

None. 

Classification 

202 Comm 

Use 

Office 

County 

Oakland 

| Sch Dist | Birmingham School District 

2. 

N/A. 

If the assessment at issue was protested, the protest was made to Respondent’s: 

[J March, 

[ July, 

[J December 

Board of Review. 

3. 

Respondent, identified above, assesses and collects taxes on the subject property. 

4. 

Petitioner 

is 

a taxpayet/party-in-interest with respect to property taxes on the subject 

property. 

5. 

The Petitioner’s principal office/legal residence address is: 

600 N. Old Woodward, Suite 

100, Birmingham, MI 48009. 

6. 

This appeal involves issues related to: 

x 

the subject property’s true cash and taxable values

Page 2

Petition 

10. 

11. 

Petitioner requests that the Tribunal enter an order reducing the 2025 values from those established 

by Respondent’s Board of Review to those contended by Petitioner, and order refunds attributable 

The tax year at issue is 2025. 

The values' established by Respondent’s Board of Review for the subject property ate: 

Parcel Number 

TCV 

SEV 

Tv 

C-19-28-351-039 

2,240,300 

1,120,150 

1,120,150 

Petitioner contends that the values’ for the subject property are: 

Parcel Number 

TCV 

SEV 

TV 

C-19-28-351-039 

500,000 

250,000 

250,000 

The values' in dispute are. 

Parcel Number 

TCV 

SEV 

TV 

C-19-28-351-039 

1,740,300 

870,150 

870,150 

Petitioner relies upon the following to support the relief requested: 

The 2025 values imposed on Petitioner’s property, and the taxes to be levied and collected 

thereon, are invalid and unlawful and operate as fraud upon the taxpayer for the reasons 

that: 

(a) 

The assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values exceed the amounts permitted 

by the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes; 

(b) 

The assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values are at higher percentages of true 

cash value than permissible under the Michigan Constitution and applicable 

statutes; 

(c) 

The assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values are based upon an erroneous 

determination of the true cash value of that portion of Petitioner’s property that is 

taxable under Michigan law and are based upon the application of wrong principles; 

and 

(d) 

The assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values, and the mode of assessment 

adopted by Respondent, discriminate against Petitioner and deny Petitioner its 

constitutional rights of uniformity, equal protection and due process of law. 

to the reductions, with interest, as provided by the Tax Tribunal Act.

Page 3

Petition 

Dated: May 30, 2025 

Filing Fee: $600 

Brian Ngjér 

Representative for Petitioner 

600 N. Old Woodward, Suite 100, 

Birmingham, MI 

(248) 731-3089 

kim@najorcompanies.com

Page 4

MON - 02 JUN 5:00P 

STANDARD OVERNIGHT 

[Rt 8816 5402 0368 

48933 

68 LANA 

wus GRR 

DANE 

oi 1k

Made from100%

recycled paperboard

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.