Michigan

Southeast Group LLC Petitioner Vs. City Of Detroit Respondent

Petitioner: Southeast Group LLC
Respondent: City Of Detroit

Case overview

Docket number: 26-002662-TT
Status: Ready Schedule
CaseType: ET Property
Division: ET
County: Wayne
Judge: No judge assigned

Docket history

Line #	Subject	Filer	Line Ref	Enter Date/Post Mark	Fee	Related Item
5	Answer was received	RESP	Not recorded	08/18/2026	Not recorded	Download
Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Download
4	Proof of service of petition was received.	Not recorded	Not recorded	07/20/2026	Not recorded	Download
Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Not recorded	Download
3	Petition has been verified	PET	1	07/14/2026	Not recorded	Download
2	Notice of Docket Number ET	Not recorded	Not recorded	07/14/2026	Not recorded	Download
1	A petition was received.	PET	Not recorded	05/27/2026	$725.00	Download

Documents

Southeast Group LLC MTT# 26-002662 answer.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

1 

 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

 

SOUTHEAST GROUP, LLC, 

 

Petitioner, 

v. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Docket No. 26-002662 

 

CITY OF DETROIT, 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Respondent. 

________________________________/ 

 

ANSWER 

 

 

RESPONDENT, CITY OF DETROIT, for its Answer to the Petition filed in this matter 

states as follows: 

1. Respondent admits. 

2. Respondent admits. 

3. Respondent admits. 

4. Respondent admits as to Respondent’s Board of Review values, however, neither 

admits nor denies Petitioner’s value contentions as Respondent lacks sufficient 

knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation. 

5. Respondent admits. 

6. Respondent admits. 

7. Respondent admits only that Petitioner’s instant Tax Tribunal appeal alleges issues 

involving valuation, assessment, taxable value, and uniformity, however, Respondent 

denies that any such allegations have merit. 

8. Respondent neither admits nor denies as Respondent lacks sufficient knowledge or 

information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation.

Page 2

2 

 

9. Respondent admits. 

10. Respondent denies as untrue. 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

Respondent further asserts that Petitioner’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, by: 

1. Petitioner’s claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 

2. Petitioner has failed to state a claim for which relief may be granted. 

3. This Tribunal lacks subject matter jurisdiction. 

WHEREFORE, Respondent City of Detroit respectfully requests that this Honorable 

Tribunal dismiss the petition in this matter and award costs and attorney fees. 

 

 

 

 

Respectfully Submitted, 

 

 

 

 

 

/s/ Kevin C. Richard 

 

 

 

 

 

Kevin C. Richard (P43417) 

 

 

 

 

 

City of Detroit Law Department 

 

 

 

 

 

Coleman A. Young Municipal Center 

 

 

 

 

 

2 Woodward Avenue, Suite 500 

 

 

 

 

 

Detroit, Michigan 48226 

 

 

 

 

 

(313) 237-3061 

Dated: August 18, 2026

Page 3

3 

 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

SOUTHEAST GROUP, LLC, 

 

Petitioner, 

v. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Docket No. 26-002662 

 

CITY OF DETROIT, 

 

Respondent. 

________________________________/ 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

On August 18, 2026, I sent by first class mail and email a copy of Respondent’s Answer 

w/Affirmative Defenses in the instant matter to: 

 

Stewart L. Mandell 

Daniel L. Stanley 

Honigman LLP 

2290 First National Building 

660 Woodward Avenue 

Detroit, Michigan 48226 

slmandell@honigman.com 

dstanley@honigman.com 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/s/ Kevin C. Richard 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kevin C. Richard (P43417) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Senior Assistant Corporation Counsel 

 

 

 

 

 

 

City of Detroit Law Department 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coleman A. Young Municipal Center 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 Woodward Avenue, Suite 500 

Dated: August 18, 2026 

 

 

Detroit, Michigan 48226

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.

EntireTribunalCaseISAnswer.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 - Respondent

MTT DOCKET NO. 26-002662

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact Information

Filer Type: 

Local Unit of Government

Local Unit of Government

City of Detroit (Wayne)

First Name

M.I.

Last Name

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

City or Town

State

ZIP Code

Telephone 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

Kevin

M.I.

C

Last Name

Richard

Firm Name (if any)

City of Detroit Law Department

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

2 Woodward Avenue, Suite 500

City or Town

Detroit

State

 Michigan

ZIP Code

48226

Telephone Number

3132373061

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

richkc@detroitmi.gov

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

Respondent or Authorized Attorney/Representative’s Signature: 

Kevin C. Richard

/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.

Southeast Group POS.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Southeast Group LLC, 

Petitioner, 

MTT Docket No. 26-002662 

Parcel Nos. 01003901.002, 

01003901.003, 

01003913., 

01003914., 

01003915., and 

01003916. 

\2 

City of Detroit, 

Respondent. 

Stewart L. Mandell (P33781) 

Honigman LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

2290 First National Building 

660 Woodward Avenue 

Detroit, MI 48226-3506 

(313) 465-7420 

slmandell@honigman.com 

Proof of Service 

Lisa Joseph states that on July 15, 2026, she did serve a copy of Petitioner's Petition, with 

docket number, upon the parties named on the attached list. > 

; 

) 

Ts nih 

Lisa Joseph 

25-0017 

757194131

Page 2

BY CERTIFIED UNITED STATES MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED: 

CLERK 

DETROIT 

804 CAYMC, 2 WOODWARD AVENUE 

DETROIT, MI 48226 

ASSESSOR 

DETROIT 

804 CAYMC, 2 WOODWARD AVENUE 

DETROIT, MI 48226 

AND BY FIRST-CLASS UNITED STATES MAIL: 

CLERK 

WAYNE COUNTY 

CAYMC, 2 WOODWARD AVENUE #211 

DETROIT, MI 48226 

DIRECTOR OF EQUALIZATION 

WAYNE COUNTY 

500 GRISWOLD ST. 21ST FLOOR 

DETROIT, MI 48226 

SECRETARY OF SCHOOL BOARD 

DETROIT PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

7321 2ND AVENUE, 14TH FLOOR 

DETROIT, MI 48202-4050 

STATE TREASURER 

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY 

TREASURY BUILDING 

430 W. ALLEGAN ST. 

LANSING, MI 48922 

75719413.1 

26-0054

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: 26-002662

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

Party Filing Document 

Petitioner

Files

Document Type: Proof of Service: Petition

Attachment File Name: Southeast Group POS

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.

Southeast Group LLC..pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

RECEIVED, 

,\ 

W 0 

MAY 27 2026 

{> 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Southeast Group LLC, 

Petitioner, 

MTT Docket No. 

v. 

Parcel Nos. 01003901.002, 

City of Detroit, 

01003001003, 

01003914., 

Respondent. 

01003915. and 

01003916. 

Stewart L. Mandell (P33781) 

Honigman LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

2290 First National Building 

Traninfo:4606 

26125062-1 

05/26/26 

660 Woodward Avenue 

Chih: 

040745 

Amt: $725.00 

Detroit, MI 48226-3506 

ID: 

HOMIGHAN LLP 

(313) 465-7420 

slmandell@honigman.com 

Petition 

Southeast Group LLC (“Petitioner”), through its attorneys, Honigman LLP, says: 

I. 

Petitioner's principal office address is 630 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, MI 48226. 

2. 

Petitioner is a party in interest with respect to property taxes on six contiguous 

parcels with parcel numbers 01003901.002, 01003901.003, 01003913., 01003914., 01003915., 

and 01003916. (collectively, "Petitioner's Property"). 

Petitioner’s Property has addresses that

Page 2

4. 

In 2026, Respondent’s March Board of Review set the taxable value and assessed 

value of Petitionet's Property as shown in the chart below: 

Respondent's Board of 

Petitioner's contended 

Review 2026 values 

2026 values 

Parcel No. 

Assessed 

Taxable 

Assessed/Taxable 

01003901.002 | $4,286,600 | 

$2,574,769 

$1,969,700 

01003901.003 | $2,008,700 

$406,538 

$406,538 

01003913. 

$24,743,200 | $24,743,200 

$13,267,400 

01003914. 

$268,800 

$129,945 

$129,945 

01003915. 

$41,800 

$24,543 

$22,200 

01003916. 

$239,600 

$18,598 

$18,598 

TOTALS 

$31,588,700 | $27,897,593 

$15,814,381 

5. 

Each above assessed value will result in a state equalized value in the same amount 

based upon the tentative equalization factor. 

6. 

Petitioner's Property 

is classified as commercial real. 

Petitioner's Property 

is 

presently used or available for use for commercial purposes. 

7. 

This matter involves issues relating to (a) valuation, (b) assessment, (c) taxable 

value, and (d) due process, equal protection, and uniformity. 

8. 

At this time, Petitioner believes, as it relates to taxable value, that there is a dispute 

relative to the value of a loss. 

9. 

March Board of Review protests for Petitioner’s Property were not required. 

10. 

Each 2026 assessment, including state equalized value and taxable value, imposed 

on Petitioner's Property, and the taxes to be levied and collected thereon, are invalid and unlawful

Page 3

(b) 

Each 2026 assessment, including state equalized value and/or taxable value, 

is at a higher percentage of true cash value than permissible under the Michigan Constitution and 

applicable statutes; 

(©) 

Each 2026 assessment, including taxable value and/or state equalized value, 

is based upon an erroneous determination of the true cash value of that portion of Petitioner's 

Property that is taxable, and is based upon the application of wrong principles; and 

(d) 

Each 2026 assessment, including state equalized value and/or taxable value, 

and the mode of assessment adopted by Respondent, discriminate against Petitioner and deny 

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

WHEREFORE, Petitioner requests that the Tax Tribunal enter an Order: (i) reducing the 

2026 taxable values, assessed values, and state equalized values of Petitioner's Property to the 

values contended per the table in paragraph four above; (ii) requiring payment to Petitioner of the 

refunds attributable to such reductions, plus interest and costs; and (iii) awarding Petitioner any 

other relief to which it is entitled. 

Respectfully submitted, 

HONIGMAN LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

Stewart L. Mandell (P33781) 

Daniel L. Stanley (P57052) 

2290 First National Building 

660 Woodward Avenue 

Detroit, MI 48226-3506

Page 4

Howcuan LLP 

COSTS ADVANCED ACCOUNT 

0407458 

Invoice Date 

Invoice Number 

Invoice Narrative 

Payment Amount 

5/27/26 

040745 

SLM/280995/571317 

725.00 

Petition for 6 parcels 

RECEIVED 

Southeast Group-Detroit TXAP 

MAY 27 2026 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

24559387.1

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.

ET_Notice_of_Docket_Number.2026-07-14_17-24-20.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

Southeast Group LLC,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

MTT Docket No.: 26-002662

City of Detroit,

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 14, 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.