Michigan

Mohamed Mansour Petitioner Vs. Township Of Mt Morris Respondent

Petitioner: Mohamed Mansour
Respondent: Township Of Mt Morris

Case overview

Docket number: 26-001405-TT
Status: Awaiting Proof of Service
CaseType: ET Property
Division: ET
County: Genesee
Judge: No judge assigned

Docket history

Line #	Subject	Filer	Line Ref	Enter Date/Post Mark	Fee	Related Item
11	Documentation	RESP	Not recorded	09/09/2026	Not recorded	Download
10	Notice of Docket Number ET	Not recorded	Not recorded	09/11/2026	Not recorded	Download
9	Order Setting Aside P Default	Not recorded	Not recorded	09/10/2026	Not recorded	Download
8	Response to Order - Petition	PET	4	08/12/2026	Not recorded	Download
7	Attachments to the Petition were filed	Not recorded	Not recorded	08/12/2026	Not recorded	Download
6	Attachments to the Petition were filed	Not recorded	Not recorded	08/12/2026	Not recorded	Download
5	Amended Petition	Not recorded	Not recorded	08/12/2026	Not recorded	Download
Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Download
4	Order of Default of Petitioner	Not recorded	Not recorded	08/11/2026	Not recorded	Download
3	Petition has been verified	PET	1	08/11/2026	Not recorded	Download
2	Notice of Docket Number ET	Not recorded	Not recorded	08/11/2026	Not recorded	Download
1	A petition was received.	PET	Not recorded	05/26/2026	$600.00	Download

Documents

20260813141022782.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

lal ou baissi 

proc 

LT I 

DRO 

52 

Ho 

0 AED 

oR, 

RECEIVED 

_gooH Br 

AUG 

1 8 2026 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

Page 2

— 

5) 

Michigan Tax Tribunal 

Mi.gov Home 

| 

Contact the Tribunal 

: Tax Tribunal Home 

Tax Docket Looku 

P wwertolof 

yhoo AE 

Taghrid Abwashah 

3 ~ Vo 894 5 

atwar Aldowbaiss, 3° 

Bool 

Tax Docket formations 

° 5 

Docket Number: |26-001157-1T 

Status: |Ready Schedule 

Petitioner: Taghrid Alwashah 

Respondent: |City Of Dearborn Heights 

Case Type: |SC Property 

Division:|Small Claims Division 

County: {Wayne 

Full Title: 

| Taghrid Alwashah Petitioner v City Of Dearborn 

Heights Respondent 

Judge: |No judge assigned 

_ Parcels/Assessments 

« Download links are available 

8233003040216000 

on the right below.

Page 3

Carlson, Julie (LARA) 

\ 

\ 

phy, OW 

d 

From: 

- 

Microsoft Outlook 

Wi 

. 

= 

oh 

CO 

To: 

0 

4 

wer lle) 

Sent: 

Tuesday, June 23, 2026 9:31 AM 

Subject: 

Undeliverable: MTT Docket No. 26-001157 

I Office 365 

Your message to anwer1010@yahoo.com couldn't be delivered. 

When Office 365 tried to send your message, the 

receiving email server outside Office 365 reported 

an error. 

LARA-taxtrib 

Office 365 

anwer1010 

Sender 

Action Regaies 

Policy violation or system 

error 

How to Fix It 

Check the "Reported Error" from the "Error Details" section shown 

below for more information about the problem. The error might tell 

you what went wrong and how to fix it. For example, if the error states 

that the message was blocked due to a potential virus or because the 

message was too large, try sending the message again without 

attachments. 

If you're not able to fix the problem, it's likely that only the recipient's 

email admin can fix it. Contact the recipient by some other means (by 

phone, for example) and ask them to tell their email admin about the 

problem. Give them the "Reported Error" from the "Error Details" 

section below.

Page 4

nature of the problem. These errors often indicate the message violates a security or 

policy setting configured on the recipient's email servers. 

If the sender is unable to fix the problem by modifying their message, then it's likely a 

problem that only the recipients email admin can fix. Try the following: 

Check the error for information about the problem 

- The "Reported Error” returned 

by the external email server can be found in the "Error Details" section below. This error 

might tell you what went wrong and provide clues for how 

error states the message was rejected due a Sender Policy 

you'll have to work with your domain registrar to correctly 

records. 

to fix it. For example, if the 

Framework (SPF) issue, then 

configure your domain's SPF 

Check the error for information about where the problem is happening 

- For 

example, look for a domain name like contoso.com. A domain name in the error might 

suggest who is responsible for the error. It could be the re cipient's email server, or it 

could be a third-party service that your organization or the recipient's organization is 

using to process or filter email messages. 

If you can't fix the problem, contact the responsible pa 

them the error code and error message from this non-delivery report (NDR) to help 

them troubleshoot the issu 

rty's email admin - Give 

e. For security or policy violation issues, it might be sufficient 

for them to just add your sending IP addresses or domain to their allowed senders list. 

it's likely that only the recipient's email admin can fix the p 

unlikely Office 365 Support will be able to 

errors. 

Original Message Details 

Created Date: 

Sender Address: 

Recipient Address: 

Subject: 

Error Details 

Error: 

6/23/2026 1:30:39 PM 

roblem. Unfortunately, it's 

help with these kinds of externally reported 

on 

qe 

LARA-taxtrib@michiga 

~~ 

J/ 

semen oS urd lo@yahen- 

Bnwer1010@yahoo cole 

MTT Docket No. 26-001157 

550 5.0.350 Remote server returned an error -> 552 

1 Requested 

mail action aborted, mailbox not found 

Message rejected by: 

mtaproxy305.free.mail.ne1.yahoo.com 

Notification Details 

Sea

Page 5

| 

| 

| 

Accept-Language: 

en-US 

Content-Language: 

en-US 

X~-MS~-Has—-Attach: 

yes 

X~-MS~-TNEF-Correlator: 

msip labels: 

MSIP Label 2f46dfe0-534f-4c95-815c~-5b1af86b9823 Actionld=abelbc57-ecc9-4£8f- 

9425-d5d£6956bd83; 

MSIP Label 2£46dfe0-534f-4c95-815¢c— 

5b1af86b9823 ContentBits=0;MSIP_Label 2f46dfe0-534f-4c95~-815¢c~ 

5b1af86b9823 Enabled=true;MSIP 

Label 2f46dfe0-534f-4c95-815¢c~ 

5hb1af86b9823 Method=Privileged;MSIP_ Label 2f46dfe0-534f-4c95-815¢c~ 

Sh1af86h9823 Name=2£46dfe0-534£-4c95-815c~5b1af86h9823; MSIP_ Label 2£46dfe0-534f-4c95~ 

815c-5b1af86b9823 SetDate=2026-06-23T13:29:50%;MSIP Label 2£46dfe0-534f-4c95-815c~ 

5h1af8609823 Siteld= =d5£h7087-3777-42ad-966a-892e£47225d1; MSIP Label 2f46dfel- 534£-4c95- 

815¢c~5b1af86b9823_ Tag=10, 

0, 

1, 

1; 

authentication-results: 

dkim=none 

(message 

not 

signed) 

header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=michigan.gov; 

x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 

1 

x-ms-publictraffictype: 

Email

Page 6

Page 7

1 

Retail 

us.

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.

ET_Notice_of_Docket_Number.2026-09-11_13-55-01.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA

DIRECTOR

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

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

Mohamed Mansour,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

MTT Docket No.: 26-001405

Township of Mt Morris,

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: September 11, 2026

PROOF OF SERVICE

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

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

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

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

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.

Order_Setting_Aside_P_Default.2026-09-10_16-31-02.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA

DIRECTOR

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

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

Mohamed Mansour, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v

 

MTT Docket No. 26-001405

City Of Mt Morris,

Respondent.

ORDER SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT

The Tribunal has considered the file in this case and finds that Petitioner was held in 

default on August 11, 2026, 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: /s/ Patricia L. Halm

Entered: September 10, 2026

PROOF OF SERVICE

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

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

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

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

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.

26-001405.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

RECEIVED 

'AUG 19 2026 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Mohamed Mansour, 

Petitioner, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL 

v 

MTT Docket No. 26-001405 

City Of Mt Morris, 

Respondent. 

ORDER OF DEFAULT 

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

Petitioner filed an Entire Tribunal case information sheet and paid a filing fee. 

Petitioner 

is required to file a petition and pay the required filing fee to initiate an appeal with the 

Tribunal. See TTR 225 and MCL 205.735a. Because a petition was not filed, the 

appeal is not properly pending. As such, Petitioner must file a petition within 14 days of 

the entry of this order. The petition shall note the docket number assigned by the 

Tribunal and if filed utilizing the Tribunal’s e-filing system, must be filed on the assigned 

docket number as an “amended petition.” 

Therefore, 

IT 1S ORDERED that Petitioner is HELD IN DEFAULT. 

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

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

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: /s/ Patricia L. Halm 

Entered: August 11, 2026

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 26-001405 

Page 2 of 2 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

| 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 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL 

AMENDED PROPERTY TAX PETITION 

Mohamed Mansour, 

Petitioner 

v, 

City of Mt Morris, 

Respondent 

MTT Docket No. 26-001405 

1. Property Parcel 

Property Parcel No.; 14-33-100-011 

Property Address: 3502 N Linden Rd, Flint, Michigan 48504 

County: Genesee County 

Property Type: Real property 

Property Classification shown on the 2026 tax bill: 202 - COMMERCIAL-VACANT 

Legal Description: 

W 198 FT OF N 264 FT OF NW 1/4 OF NW 1/4 SEC 33 TSN R6E 1.20 A 

2, Tax Year and Assessment Information 

Tax Year(s) Appealed: 2026 

The 2026 tax bill identifies a taxable value of $21,000, an SEV of $21,000, and an assessed value of $21,000. 

The assessment or assessments at issue were protested before the Respondents Board of Review on: March 

2026 

3. Statement of Facts 

1. Petitioner, Mohamed Mansour, is the owner and taxpayer identified for Parcel No, 14-33- 100-011. 

2. The property is located at 3502 N Linden Rd, Flint, Michigan 48504, and contains approximately 1.20 

acres. 

3. The 2026 tax record classifies the property as 202 — COMMERCIAL-VACANT. 

4. The 2026 tax record reports an assessed value and SEV of $21,000 and a taxable value of $21,000. 

8, Petitioner disputes the assessment and seeks review by the Michigan Tax Tribunal.

Page 4

4. Grounds for Appeal

These site-specific limitations materially affect the property's development potential and, consequently, its

market value. Petitioner requests that the Tribunal consider these limitations and the attached engineering

correspondence and GIS exhibits when determining the property's true cash value.

Based on the drain and likely casement, floodplain, floodway, possible wetlands, and applicable setbacks, the

engineer concludes that the site is a very difficult site to develop and that, after those factors are considered,

there may be little or no buildable area.

The correspondence also identifies possible wetlands covering most of the site based on the county GIS

wetlands information. It notes that the online wetlands viewer is not sufficiently reliable to establish a final

wetlands boundary and that a formal wetlands assessment would be required to determine whether wetlands

are present and, if so, their boundaries.

The engineer further states that the southwest corner of the site appears to be outside the floodplain, but that

the buildable area would still be reduced by applicable setbacks.

The site also contains a floodway and a 100-year floodplain. The engineer's correspondence states that the

100-year floodplain covers over half of the site and that

a maximum of 300 cubic yards of fill is normally

allowed before compensating cut is required.

The correspondence states that a county drain crosses the site diagonally and that the Drain Commissioner will

typically have an easement centered on such a drain, restricting what can be done within the easement.

Petitioner retained Daniel W. Bartlett, PE, CEM, Associate / Project Manager with ROWE Professional

Setvices Company, to evaluate the site in connection with a proposed building project. Mr. Bartlett provided

written correspondence regarding the site's development constraints.

Petitioner contends that the

Page 5

The

Page 6

Page 7

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.

Message.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

Subject

FW: [EXTERNAL]: Re: Site

Development - 3502 N

Linden Rd Flint

From

Ken Perry

<KPerry@rowepsc.com>

To:

drlovetheﬁrst@yahoo.com

<drlovetheﬁrst@yahoo.com>

Date

Dec 17, 2025 at 3:51 PM

Attached is a scope of work and

estimate.  Let me know if you

have any questions.

 

Ken Perry, PS |

Survey Project

Manager

ROWE Professional

Services Company

ENR Top 500 Design

Firm

O: (810) 341-7500 | C:

(248) 252-3005

540 S. Saginaw Street,

Ste. 200 | Flint, MI

48502

www.rowepsc.com

  

  

  

  

This electronic mail, including any

attachments may contain conﬁdential

information protected by law and is intended

solely for use by the individual to whom or

entity to which it is addressed. If the reader

of this message is not the intended recipient,

or an employee or agent responsible for

Page 2

delivering this message, the reader is hereby

notiﬁed that any use, dissemination,

distribution or copying of the information is

strictly prohibited. If you have received this

communication in error, please notify me

immediately by phone or return electronic

mail. Thank you.

 

From: Ken Perry

Sent: Thursday, December 4,

2025 10:36 AM

To: drlovetheﬁrst@yahoo.com

Subject: FW: [EXTERNAL]: Re:

Site Development - 3502 N

Linden Rd Flint

 

See our engineer’s comments in

the email immediately

below…………………………..

 

From: Dan Bartlett

<DBartlett@rowepsc.com>

Sent: Thursday, December 4,

2025 10:24 AM

To: Ken Perry

<KPerry@rowepsc.com>

Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL]: Re:

Site Development - 3502 N

Linden Rd Flint

 

Ken,

 

We wouldn’t really know how

much of the site is developable

until a wetlands assessment is

done. We have typically used

Marx Wetlands for those. After

that I recommend having an

Page 3

that I recommend having an

onsite pre-application meeting

with EGLE to discuss the project

and potential for wetlands

impacts. EGLE may waive

wetland mitigation requirements

for impacts under 1/3 of an

acre,  but that needs to be

discussed with and approved by

them.

 

The other thing to keep in mind

are the ﬂoodplain limits. The

ﬂoodplain map I sent from GIS is

approximate, the legal limits of

the ﬂoodplain are based on

elevation and will need to be

mapped based on a topo survey

we would need to perform.

Some work within the ﬂoodplain

may be permissible, but any ﬁlls

will need to be offset by a

compensating cut elsewhere.

EGLE may also require a

hydraulic analysis to prove no

adverse impacts to the

ﬂoodplain.

 

The presence of a ﬂoodway and

county drain easement will likely

mean that a drive across the

drain won’t be permitted. They

may be able to develop the SW

and NE corner, with separate

drives to the adjacent public

roads, but they likely won’t be

able to connect them together so

you could directly drive between

them.

Page 4

There are also setbacks to work

with. Looks Like for C-2 zoning

they are 50’ for front and rear,

and 15’ for side yard. No building

will be allowed within that.

Parking front yard setbacks

where the road is are 20’ from

the right of way line.

 

Daniel W. Bartlett,

PE, CFM | Associate

| Project Manager

ROWE Professional

Services Company

ENR Top 500 Design

Firm

O: (810) 341-7500 | C:

(810) 569-7982

540 S. Saginaw Street,

Ste. 200 | Flint, MI

48502

www.rowepsc.com

  

  

  

  

This electronic mail, including any

attachments may contain conﬁdential

information protected by law and is intended

solely for use by the individual to whom or

entity to which it is addressed. If the reader

of this message is not the intended recipient,

or an employee or agent responsible for

delivering this message, the reader is hereby

notiﬁed that any use, dissemination,

distribution or copying of the information is

strictly prohibited. If you have received this

communication in error, please notify me

immediately by phone or return electronic

Page 5

immediately by phone or return electronic

mail. Thank you.

 

From: Ken Perry

<KPerry@rowepsc.com>

Sent: Wednesday, December 3,

2025 6:55 AM

To: Dan Bartlett

<DBartlett@rowepsc.com>

Subject: FW: [EXTERNAL]: Re:

Site Development - 3502 N

Linden Rd Flint

 

After I emailed your assessment

to the prospect, he did some

research and asked if

development is possible.  See

below highlighted in yellow

 

Ken Perry, PS | Survey Project

Manager

ROWE Professional Services

Company

ENR Top 500 Design Firm

O: (810) 341-7500 | C: (248) 252-

3005

540 S. Saginaw Street, Ste. 200 |

Flint, MI 48502

www.rowepsc.com

 

  

  

  

This electronic mail, including any

attachments may contain conﬁdential

Page 6

attachments may contain conﬁdential

information protected by law and is intended

solely for use by the individual to whom or

entity to which it is addressed. If the reader

of this message is not the intended recipient,

or an employee or agent responsible for

delivering this message, the reader is hereby

notiﬁed that any use, dissemination,

distribution or copying of the information is

strictly prohibited. If you have received this

communication in error, please notify me

immediately by phone or return electronic

mail. Thank

Page 7

drain.

According to the state

requirements we need a

Page 8

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.

No Reserve Auction - Bidder drlovethefirst - Buyers Receipt.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

Amount Due

Lot(s) Won

Winning Bid

8405

$1,400.00

8515

$1,200.00

8621

$12,000.00

8648

$2,100.00

Subtotal

$16,700.00

Other Fees

Amount

Lot 8405 Deed Fee

$30.00

Lot 8515 Deed Fee

$30.00

Lot 8621 Deed Fee

$30.00

Lot 8648 Deed Fee

$30.00

Lot 8405 Buyer's Premium

$140.00

Lot 8515 Buyer's Premium

$120.00

Lot 8621 Buyer's Premium

$1,200.00

Lot 8648 Buyer's Premium

$210.00

Lot 8405 Summer Tax

$464.98

Lot 8515 Summer Tax

$582.13

Lot 8621 Summer Tax

$4,633.50

Lot 8648 Summer Tax

$577.08

2.75% CC Fee

$275.00

Grand Total

$25,022.69

Payments

Grand Total

$25,022.69

Credit Card

$10,275.00

Base Charge

$10,000.00

2.75% CC Fee

$275.00

Wire Transfer

$14,747.69

Balance

$0.00

Received of ("Buyer"):

Bidder Number - drlovethefirst

Mohamed Mansour

(407)620-3003 (tel:(407)620-3003)

drlovethefirst@yahoo.com

3507 sunset dr

flint, mi, 48503

Auction Receipt

Lots Won

Lot Number

Parcel IDs

8405

14-33-100-011 (tel:14-33-100-011)

8515

41-08-131-022 (tel:41-08-131-022)

8621

46-36-279-036 (tel:46-36-279-036)

8648

47-31-180-007 (tel:47-31-180-007)

REMEMBER: If you have not yet executed and returned the Buyer’s Affidavit and Affidavit of Entity

Ownership (if applicable) that were emailed to you after the auction, you must do so IMMEDIATELY!

If you fail to return these documents to us, your sale will be cancelled!

https://www.tax-sale.info/checkout/getOnlineReceipt/41374

8/12/26, 8:49 AM

Page 1 of 1

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.

MTT_Docket_26-001405_Amended_Petition copy.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

AMENDED PROPERTY TAX PETITION

Mohamed Mansour,

Petitioner

MTT Docket No. 26-001405

City of Mt Morris,

Respondent

1. Property Parcel

Property Parcel No.: 14-33-100-011

Property Address: 3502 N Linden Rd, Flint, Michigan 48504

County: Genesee County

Property Type: Real property

Property Classification shown on the 2026 tax bill: 202 – COMMERCIAL-VACANT

Legal Description: W 198 FT OF N 264 FT OF NW 1/4 OF NW 1/4 SEC 33 T8N R6E 1.20 A

2. Tax Year and Assessment Information

Tax Year(s) Appealed: 2026 [CONFIRM IF OTHER YEARS ARE ALSO AT ISSUE]

The 2026 tax bill identifies a taxable value of $21,000, an SEV of $21,000, and an assessed value of $21,000.

The assessment or assessments at issue were protested before the Respondent’s Board of Review on: March

2026

3. Statement of Facts

1. Petitioner, Mohamed Mansour, is the owner and taxpayer identified for Parcel No. 14-33-100-011.

2. The property is located at 3502 N Linden Rd, Flint, Michigan 48504, and contains approximately 1.20

acres.

3. The 2026 tax record classifies the property as 202 – COMMERCIAL-VACANT.

4. The 2026 tax record reports an assessed value and SEV of $21,000 and a taxable value of $21,000.

5. Petitioner disputes the assessment and seeks review by the Michigan Tax Tribunal.

6. Petitioner relies on the evidence and documentation submitted with this petition and reserves the right to

supplement the factual and legal basis of the appeal as permitted by the Tribunal’s rules and orders.

Petitioner believes that, given the property's current physical and development limitations, including the drain,

likely easement, floodway, floodplain, possible wetlands, and setbacks, the property would be extremely

difficult to sell even at a price of $1,400 in its present condition.

Petitioner states that the property was offered for sale for $14,999 on September 12, 2024, but did not sell at

that asking price.

Petitioner acquired the property for $1,400.

Page 2

4. Grounds for Appeal

These site-specific limitations materially affect the property's development potential and, consequently, its

market value. Petitioner requests that the Tribunal consider these limitations and the attached engineering

correspondence and GIS exhibits when determining the property's true cash value.

Based on the drain and likely easement, floodplain, floodway, possible wetlands, and applicable setbacks, the

engineer concludes that the site is a very difficult site to develop and that, after those factors are considered,

there may be little or no buildable area.

The correspondence also identifies possible wetlands covering most of the site based on the county GIS

wetlands information. It notes that the online wetlands viewer is not sufficiently reliable to establish a final

wetlands boundary and that a formal wetlands assessment would be required to determine whether wetlands

are present and, if so, their boundaries.

The engineer further states that the southwest corner of the site appears to be outside the floodplain, but that

the buildable area would still be reduced by applicable setbacks.

The site also contains a floodway and a 100-year floodplain. The engineer's correspondence states that the

100-year floodplain covers over half of the site and that a maximum of 300 cubic yards of fill is normally

allowed before compensating cut is required.

The correspondence states that a county drain crosses the site diagonally and that the Drain Commissioner will

typically have an easement centered on such a drain, restricting what can be done within the easement.

Petitioner retained Daniel W. Bartlett, PE, CFM, Associate / Project Manager with ROWE Professional

Services Company, to evaluate the site in connection with a proposed building project. Mr. Bartlett provided

written correspondence regarding the site's development constraints.

Petitioner contends that the assessment of the subject property does not reflect its true cash value because

substantial physical and environmental conditions materially limit the property's usable area and development

potential.

Petitioner respectfully requests that the Tribunal consider the actual acquisition price, the unsuccessful prior

listing, the property's physical limitations, and the engineering evidence when determining true cash value.

Petitioner believes that the property's inability to attract a buyer at the prior $14,999 asking price, together with

the documented development constraints, is evidence that the property's actual market value is substantially

lower than a valuation that assumes the entire 1.20 acres is usable commercial land.

The $1,400 acquisition price is also relevant evidence of the property's market value. Petitioner further states

that the property was listed for $14,999 on September 12, 2024 and did not sell at that asking price.

This public listing history provides independent corroboration of the

Page 3

The

Page 4

____

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.

SubsequentFiling.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA

DIRECTOR

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

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

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

Docket Number: 26-001405

Is this case currently pending in the Small Claims Division? No

Party Filing Document 

Petitioner

Files

Document Type: Amended Petition

Attachment File Name: MTT_Docket_26-001405_Amended_Petition copy

Document Type: Attachments to Petition

Attachment File Name: No Reserve Auction - Bidder drlovethefirst - Buyers Receipt

Document Type: Attachments to Petition

Attachment File Name: Message

Fee Information

Filing Fee: $ 0.00

Payment Information

Payment: $ 0.00

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.

ET_Order_of_Default_Petition.2026-08-11_13-48-19.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA

DIRECTOR

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

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

Mohamed Mansour,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

MTT Docket No. 26-001405

City Of Mt Morris,

Respondent.

ORDER OF DEFAULT

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

Petitioner filed an Entire Tribunal case information sheet and paid a filing fee. Petitioner

is required to file a petition and pay the required filing fee to initiate an appeal with the

Tribunal. See TTR 225 and MCL 205.735a. Because a petition was not filed, the

appeal is not properly pending. As such, Petitioner must file a petition within 14 days of

the entry of this order. The petition shall note the docket number assigned by the

Tribunal and if filed utilizing the Tribunal’s e-filing system, must be filed on the assigned

docket number as an “amended petition.”

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner is HELD IN DEFAULT.

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

above, within 14 days of the entry of this order.1

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: /s/ Patricia L. Halm

Entered: August 11, 2026

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

act, MCL 205.735a.” TTR 225(5).

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 26-001405

Page 2 of 2

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.

EntireTribunalCaseISPetition.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

Entire Tribunal Case Information Sheet - Petitioner

MTT DOCKET NO. 

 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information

Filer type: 

Individual 

Local Unit of Government

First Name

Mohamed

M.I.

Last Name/Company Name

Mansour

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

1010 crystal wood dr

City or Town

Davison

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48423

Telephone Number

4076203003

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

drlovethefirst@yahoo.com

 

 

Section 2: Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information

First Name

Cheryl

M.I.

Last Name

Abernathy

Firm Name (if any)

Cheryl

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

1010 crystal wood dr

City or Town

Davison

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48423

Telephone Number

4076203003

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

cherylma33@gmail.com

 

Section 3: Issue 

Please designate one: 

Valuation 

 

Section 4: Subject Property Information 

How many parcels are you 

appealing?

1

Property Address (No., Street, City, ST, ZIP) [If multiple, list first property’s address]

3502 n linden rd

Flint

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

Michigan

48504

Taxing Authority (City or Township)

City Of Mt Morris (GENESEE) 

County

Genesee

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

(*If no, you must file separate appeals for each non-contiguous or non-adjoining parcel.)

Yes

 

 

Section 5: Check which of the following you are appealing (check all that apply) 

True Cash and Taxable Values

If “Other”, please explain:

 

 

Section 6: Valuation Information for Each Parcel under Appeal

Parcel Number:

1433100011

Classification of Property: Personal (check one)

Commercial (check one)

Current Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value) as established by the Board of Review:

45500

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

45500

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

1400

Multiply the True Cash Value by 50% and enter here. This is your contention of Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value).

700

If you belive the Taxable Value differs from your contention of Assessed Value, enter your contention of Taxable Value.

700

Fee Information

The filing fee is based on the greater of State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention. If you are appealing more than one parcel, the parcel with the 

highest State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention will be used to determine your filing fee, plus $25.00 will be added for each additional parcel being 

appealed.

If the State Equalized Value or Taxable Value in contention is: Your filing fee is:

 

 $100,000.00 and under $250.00

 $100,000.01 to $500,000.00 $400.00

 $Over $500,000.00 $600.00

* Plus $25.00 for each additional parcel, not to exceed a total filing fee of $2,000.00.

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR

A fee of $250.00 is required for the filing of a Special Assessment Appeal.

A fee of $250.00 is required for the filing of an Equalization Tax Appeal.

A fee of $250.00 is required for the filing of a Non-Property Tax Appeal.

A fee of $150.00 is required for the filing of a Classification Tax Appeal

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

Petitioner or Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Signature: 

/s/ Mohamed Mansour

Payment Information

Amount: 600

Success: True

Message: ""

Waiver Code:

Transaction Number: 26052686922833

Supporting Waiver Documents:

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.

ET_Notice_of_Docket_Number.2026-08-11_13-46-59.pdfRead complete document text →