Sugar Tree Mv LLC, Petitioner Vs. City Of Caro, 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

Sugar Tree MV LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v 

 MTT Docket No. 25-002150

City Of Caro,

Respondent.

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO WITHDRAW

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

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

have filed a Joint Motion to Withdraw the appeal. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the parties’ Joint Motion to Withdraw is GRANTED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED. 

This order resolves all pending issues and closes the case.

By:_____________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: April 24, 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

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

Sugar Tree MV LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v 

 MTT Docket No. 25-002150

City Of Caro,

Respondent.

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO WITHDRAW

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

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

have filed a Joint Motion to Withdraw the appeal. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the parties’ Joint Motion to Withdraw is GRANTED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED. 

This order resolves all pending issues and closes the case.

By:_____________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: April 24, 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.

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 

Petitioner(s) 

v 

MTT Docket No. 

_____________________________, 

Respondent(s) 

JOINT MOTION TO WITHDRAW APPEAL 

1. Petitioner wishes to withdraw its appeal in the above-captioned docket.

2. Good cause exists to grant withdraw of the above-captioned docket due to the

agreement of the parties.

3. Petitioner asks the Tribunal to grant its request to withdraw the appeal and dismiss

the above-captioned docket.

4. Petitioner is filing this Motion to Withdraw after Respondent has filed an Answer with

the Tribunal. Respondent’s written consent to withdraw the petition is evidenced by

its signature below.

__________________________ 

Attorney for Petitioner 

Nicholas J. LeFevre (P62897)

6120 Trumbull

Detroit, MI 48208

Phone: (313)583-4200

Email: nick@shsgrp.com

Dated: 4/23/2026

__________________________ 

Attorney for Respondent

Thomas K. Dillon (P81136) 

1700 East Beltline, N.E., Suite 200

Grand Rapids, MI 49525

Phone: (616) 726-2258

Email: tdillon@fosterswift.com

Dated: 4/23/2026

25-002150-TT

SUGAR TREE MV LLC

CITY OF CARO

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 JANUARY 19 - 29, 2027 PREHEARING GENERAL CALL AND ORDER 

OF PROCEDURE

Sugar Tree MV LLC,

Petitioner,

v

 

 

City Of Caro,

Respondent.

 MTT Docket No. 25-002150

Please be advised that 25-002150 has been placed on a two-week Prehearing General 

Call commencing January 19, 2027. 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. 25-002150

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 September 22, 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 September 22, 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 

September 22, 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

Page 3

MT

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

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SYSTEM 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

SUGAR TREE MV LLC, 

Petitioner, 

v 

CITY OF CARO, 

Respondent. 

MTT DOCKET NO. 25-002150 

PPN: 050-035-000-3100-00 

Nicholas J. LeFevre (P62897) 

SHS GROUP/LEFEVRE ASSOCIATES 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

6120 Trumbull St. 

Detroit, MI 48208 

(313) 583-4200 

nick@shsgrp.com 

Laura J. Genovich (P72278) 

Thomas K. Dillon (P81136) 

FOSTER, SWIFT, COLLINS & SMITH, P.C. 

Attorneys for Respondent 

1700 East Beltline Ave. NE, Suite 200 

Grand Rapids, MI 49525 

(616) 726-2258 

lgenovich@fosterswift.com 

tdillon@fosterswift.com 

On October 27, 2025, 

1 served 

a copy of Respondent City of Caro’s Answer and 

Affirmative Defenses to Amended Entire Tribunal Property Tax Petition 

, along with a copy of 

this Proof of Service, upon the parties of record at their last known business address, by first class 

U.S. mail, postage prepaid. 

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

belief. 

Date: 

October 27, 2025 

87253:00017:202100696-1 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

aclyn R. 

Folkema 

— Legal Assistant

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

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SYSTEM 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

 

SUGAR TREE MV LLC, 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

v 

 

CITY OF CARO, 

 

 

Respondent. 

 

 

MTT DOCKET NO. 25-002150 

 

PPN: 050-035-000-3100-00 

 

 

 

 

 

Nicholas J. LeFevre (P62897) 

SHS GROUP/LEFEVRE ASSOCIATES 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

6120 Trumbull St. 

Detroit, MI 48208 

(313) 583-4200 

nick@shsgrp.com 

 

 

 

Laura J. Genovich (P72278) 

Thomas K. Dillon (P81136) 

FOSTER, SWIFT, COLLINS & SMITH, P.C. 

Attorneys for Respondent 

1700 East Beltline Ave. NE, Suite 200 

Grand Rapids, MI 49525 

(616) 726-2258 

lgenovich@fosterswift.com 

tdillon@fosterswift.com 

 

 

RESPONDENT CITY OF CARO’S ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO 

AMENDED ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION 

 

 

Respondent, City of Caro, by and through its attorneys, Foster, Swift, Collins & Smith, 

P.C., states as follows for its Answer to Petitioner’s Amended Entire Tribunal Property Tax 

Petition: 

1. 

Property Parcel No.: 050-035-000-3100-00. 

ANSWER: 

Respondent admits the allegation contained in paragraph 1. 

 

2. 

The property identified above is Real property. 

ANSWER: 

Respondent admits the allegation contained in paragraph 2.

Page 2

3. 

If more than one parcel of real property is under appeal, are the properties 

contiguous? Intentionally omitted; not applicable. 

ANSWER: 

Paragraph 3 contains no allegation to which a response is required. 

4. 

Are all of the parcels of personal property located on a parcel of real property under 

appeal? Intentionally omitted; not applicable. 

ANSWER: 

Paragraph 4 contains no allegation to which a response is required. 

 

5. 

If parcels of personal property are under appeal, when were the personal property 

statements filed by parcel number? Not applicable; no personal property is being appealed. 

ANSWER: 

Paragraph 5 contains no allegation to which a response is required. 

6. 

The property identified above is classified as Commercial. 

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegation of paragraph 6 of the Petition. 

 7. 

If the assessment or assessments at issue were protested, the protest was made to 

Respondent’s __ March __ July __ December Board of Review. Intentionally omitted; not 

applicable. 

ANSWER: Paragraph 7 contains no allegation to which a response is required. 

8. 

If a protest was required and no protest was made, list the separate and specific 

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the assessment or 

assessments at issue: Not applicable; no protest was made or required. 

ANSWER: 

Respondent admits that no protest was made. Respondent neither admits nor 

denies Petitioner’s legal conclusion that no protest was required. 

 

9. 

If the appeal was not submitted by the deadline for the filing of an appeal for the 

classification or classifications of the properties at issue, list the separate and specific facts upon 

which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the assessment or assessments at 

issue: Not applicable; appeal is timely submitted.

Page 3

ANSWER: 

Respondent neither admits nor denies that Petitioner’s appeal was timely 

submitted and leaves Petitioner to its proofs. Respondent reserves the right to raise 

affirmative defenses regarding the Tribunal’s subject matter jurisdiction over the instant 

appeal. 

 

10. 

The property or properties at issue are located in Tuscola County. The property or 

properties’ address is: 1303 Sugar Tree Court, Caro, MI 48723. 

ANSWER: Respondent admits the allegations of paragraph 10 of the Petition. 

11. 

The assessment or assessments at issue were established by the (applicable local 

government unit): City of Caro through Tuscola County Equalization Department. 

ANSWER: Respondent admits that the City of Caro established the assessment of the 

Subject Property. 

12. 

Petitioner’s legal residence or principal office address is: 

 

1303 Sugar Tree Court 

Caro, MI 48723 

 

ANSWER: Respondent is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as 

to the truth of the allegations of paragraph 12 of the Petition and, therefore, neither admits 

nor denies the allegations, but leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

 

13. 

This appeal involves issues relating to the property or properties’

Page 4

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.

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. 25-002150

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact Information

Filer Type: Local Unit of Government

City Of Caro (TUSCOLA)

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

Tom

M.I.

Last Name

Dillon

Firm Name (if any)

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

1700 E Beltline NE, Ste 200

City or Town

Grand Rapids

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

49525

Telephone Number

616-726-2258

Fax Number

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

tdillon@fosterswift.com

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

Respondent or Authorized Attorney/Representative’s Signature: 

Thomas K. Dillon

/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 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

DIRECTOR 

SUGAR TREE MV LLC 

, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Petitioner(s) 

v 

MTT Docket No. 25-002150-TT 

CITY OF CARO 

, 

Respondent(s) 

PROOF OF SERVICE FOR PROPERTY TAX PETITION 

*To be filed after the Tribunal issues the Notice of Docket Number* 

Jessica Wathen 

states that on 9/29/2025 

he/she 

[Name of person serving/mailing petition] 

[date of service] 

served a copy of the Petition relative to the above-captioned matter upon: 

[Provide name and address of the following entities] 

1. 

Assessor (via certified mail): 

City of Caro Assessing Department c/o Tuscola County Equalization Department 

TENT, 

T25 WW TIMCoNT 

St Caro, MrasT23 

2. 

City Clerk or Township Supervisor/Clerk (via certified mail): 

Rita Papp, City Clerk 

Caro Municipal Building, 317 S. State St., Caro, MI 48723 

3. 

County Equalization Director (vi 

first class 

mail or personal service): 

Tuscola County Equalization Department 

~— 

“TUSTOTa Cou 

AUMIISIratve Services Bult, 

EqUanzanon Deparment, 125 Wisi 

St Caro M457 

4. 

County Clerk (vi 

fifst class mail or personal service): 

Jodi Fetting, Tuscola County Clerk 

440 N. State St., Caro, MI 48723 

Caro Community Schools, 301 North Hooper St., Caro, MI 48723 

6. 

State Treasurer (viafirst class mail): 

Michigan Department of Treasury, State Treasurer

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

Sugar Tree MV LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002150

City Of Caro,

Respondent.

ORDER SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT

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

was held in default on August 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: September 4, 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

Sugar Tree MV LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002150

City Of Caro,

Respondent.

ORDER SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT

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

was held in default on August 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: September 4, 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

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

Petitioner(s)

v

MTT Docket No.

_____________________________,

Respondent(s)

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION

1.

Property Parcel No: _____________________________________________

(If more than one parcel is at issue, attach a completed Multiple Parcel Petition

Form addressing all other parcels at issue.)

2.

The property identified above is ___real ___personal.

3.

If more than one parcel of real property is under appeal, are the properties

contiguous? ___Yes ___No. (If no, separate Petitions are required for each non-

contiguous parcel.)

4.

Are all of the parcels of personal property located on a parcel of real property

under appeal? ___Yes ___No. (If no, separate Petitions are required for each

parcel of personal property not located on a parcel of real property under

appeal.)

5.

If parcels of personal property are under appeal, when were the personal

property statements filed by parcel number (attach additional page if necessary):

6.

The property identified above is classified as _________________________

7.

If the assessment or assessments at issue were protested, the protest was made

to Respondent’s ___ March ___ July ___December Board of Review.

,QWHQWLRQDOO\RPLWWHGQRWDSSOLFDEOH

,QWHQWLRQDOO\RPLWWHGQRWDSSOLFDEOH

,QWHQWLRQDOO\RPLWWHGQRWDSSOLFDEOH

AMENDED

SUGAR TREE MV LLC

25-002150

CITY OF CARO

050-035-000-3100-00

X

Not applicable; no personal property is being appealed.

COMMERCIAL

Page 2

MTT Docket No. _________________ 

Page 2 of 4 

 

8. 

If a protest was required and no protest was made, list the separate and specific 

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the 

assessment or assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 

 

 

 

 

 

9. 

If the appeal was not submitted by the deadline for the filing of an appeal for the 

classification or classifications of the properties at issue (i.e., May 31 or July 31 

of the tax year involved), list the separate and specific facts upon which 

Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the assessment or 

assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 

 

 

 

 

 

10. 

The property or properties at issue are located in _______________County. The 

property or properties’ address is: 

 

 

 

 

 

11. 

The assessment or assessments at issue were established by the (applicable 

local governmental unit): ________________________________________ 

 

12. 

Petitioner’s legal residence or principal office address is: 

 

 

 

 

 

13. 

This appeal involves issues relating to the (check all that are applicable): 

________the property or properties’ true cash and taxable values 

________the property or properties’ taxable value only 

If the property or properties’ taxable value is at issue, is there a 

dispute as to the value of an addition or loss? ___ Yes ___No 

________uniformity of the property or properties’ assessment 

________the property or the properties’ exemption from ad valorem taxation 

 under MCL ______ 

 

14. 

The tax year(s) at issue are: _______________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

25-002150

Not applicable; no protest was made or required.

Not applicable; appeal is timely submitted.

Tuscola

1303 Sugar Tree Court

Caro, MI 48723

City of Caro through Tuscola County Equalization Department.

1303 Sugar Tree Court

Caro, MI 48723

X

X

2025

Page 3

MTT Docket No. _________________ 

Page 3 of 4 

 

15. 

If more than the current tax year is being appealed, list the separate and specific 

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the prior 

tax year or years (attach additional page if necessary): 

 

 

 

 

 

16. 

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 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

17. 

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

 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State

Page 4

MT

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

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

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

Sugar Tree MV LLC,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002150

City Of Caro,

Respondent.

ORDER OF DEFAULT

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

Petitioner failed to file a complete petition. See TTR 233. The amended 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.” 

Tribunal rules and information on Entire Tribunal petitions can be found on our website 

at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib. Further, although you paid a filing fee, it is not clear that 

the full required filing fee has been paid, as the petition does not provide the required 

contentions of value. As such, Petitioner must file an amended petition and pay the 

remainder of the filing fee, if any, within 14 days of the entry of this order.

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner is HELD IN DEFAULT.

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

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

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

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

By:_______________________________

Entered: August 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

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-002150

Page 2 of 2

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

act, MCL 205.735a.” TTR 225(5)

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

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA

DIRECTOR

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

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

_____________________________,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

Petitioner(s)

v

MTT Docket No.

_____________________________,

Respondent(s)

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION

1.

Property Parcel No: _____________________________________________

(If more than one parcel is at issue, attach a completed Multiple Parcel Petition

Form addressing all other parcels at issue.)

2.

The property identified above is ___real ___personal.

3.

If more than one parcel of real property is under appeal, are the properties

contiguous? ___Yes ___No. (If no, separate Petitions are required for each non-

contiguous parcel.)

4.

Are all of the parcels of personal property located on a parcel of real property

under appeal? ___Yes ___No. (If no, separate Petitions are required for each

parcel of personal property not located on a parcel of real property under

appeal.)

5.

If parcels of personal property are under appeal, when were the personal

property statements filed by parcel number (attach additional page if necessary):

6.

The property identified above is classified as _________________________

7.

If the assessment or assessments at issue were protested, the protest was made

to Respondent’s ___ March ___ July ___December Board of Review.

,QWHQWLRQDOO\RPLWWHGQRWDSSOLFDEOH

,QWHQWLRQDOO\RPLWWHGQRWDSSOLFDEOH

,QWHQWLRQDOO\RPLWWHGQRWDSSOLFDEOH

SUGAR TREE MV LLC

TO BE ASSIGNED

CITY OF CARO

050-035-000-3100-00

X

Not applicable; no personal property is being appealed.

COMMERCIAL

Page 2

MTT Docket No. _________________ 

Page 2 of 4 

 

8. 

If a protest was required and no protest was made, list the separate and specific 

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the 

assessment or assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 

 

 

 

 

 

9. 

If the appeal was not submitted by the deadline for the filing of an appeal for the 

classification or classifications of the properties at issue (i.e., May 31 or July 31 

of the tax year involved), list the separate and specific facts upon which 

Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the assessment or 

assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 

 

 

 

 

 

10. 

The property or properties at issue are located in _______________County. The 

property or properties’ address is: 

 

 

 

 

 

11. 

The assessment or assessments at issue were established by the (applicable 

local governmental unit): ________________________________________ 

 

12. 

Petitioner’s legal residence or principal office address is: 

 

 

 

 

 

13. 

This appeal involves issues relating to the (check all that are applicable): 

________the property or properties’ true cash and taxable values 

________the property or properties’ taxable value only 

If the property or properties’ taxable value is at issue, is there a 

dispute as to the value of an addition or loss? ___ Yes ___No 

________uniformity of the property or properties’ assessment 

________the property or the properties’ exemption from ad valorem taxation 

 under MCL ______ 

 

14. 

The tax year(s) at issue are: _______________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TO BE ASSIGNED

Not applicable; no protest was made or required.

Not applicable; appeal is timely submitted.

Tuscola

1303 Sugar Tree Court

Caro, MI 48723

City of Caro through Tuscola County Equalization Department.

1303 Sugar Tree Court

Caro, MI 48723

X

X

2025

Page 3

MTT Docket No. _________________ 

Page 3 of 4 

 

15. 

If more than the current tax year is being appealed, list the separate and specific 

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the prior 

tax year or years (attach additional page if necessary): 

 

 

 

 

 

16. 

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 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

17. 

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

 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value

Page 4

MTT

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

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

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

Sugar Tree MV LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

v

MTT Docket No.: 25-002150

City Of Caro, 

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: August 14, 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

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

Petitioner(s)

v

MTT Docket No.

_____________________________,

Respondent(s)

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION

1.

Property Parcel No: _____________________________________________

(If more than one parcel is at issue, attach a completed Multiple Parcel Petition

Form addressing all other parcels at issue.)

2.

The property identified above is ___real ___personal.

3.

If more than one parcel of real property is under appeal, are the properties

contiguous? ___Yes ___No. (If no, separate Petitions are required for each non-

contiguous parcel.)

4.

Are all of the parcels of personal property located on a parcel of real property

under appeal? ___Yes ___No. (If no, separate Petitions are required for each

parcel of personal property not located on a parcel of real property under

appeal.)

5.

If parcels of personal property are under appeal, when were the personal

property statements filed by parcel number (attach additional page if necessary):

6.

The property identified above is classified as _________________________

7.

If the assessment or assessments at issue were protested, the protest was made

to Respondent’s ___ March ___ July ___December Board of Review.

,QWHQWLRQDOO\RPLWWHGQRWDSSOLFDEOH

,QWHQWLRQDOO\RPLWWHGQRWDSSOLFDEOH

,QWHQWLRQDOO\RPLWWHGQRWDSSOLFDEOH

SUGAR TREE MV LLC

TO BE ASSIGNED

CITY OF CARO

050-035-000-3100-00

X

Not applicable; no personal property is being appealed.

COMMERCIAL

Page 2

MTT Docket No. _________________ 

Page 2 of 4 

 

8. 

If a protest was required and no protest was made, list the separate and specific 

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the 

assessment or assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 

 

 

 

 

 

9. 

If the appeal was not submitted by the deadline for the filing of an appeal for the 

classification or classifications of the properties at issue (i.e., May 31 or July 31 

of the tax year involved), list the separate and specific facts upon which 

Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the assessment or 

assessments at issue (attach additional page if necessary): 

 

 

 

 

 

10. 

The property or properties at issue are located in _______________County. The 

property or properties’ address is: 

 

 

 

 

 

11. 

The assessment or assessments at issue were established by the (applicable 

local governmental unit): ________________________________________ 

 

12. 

Petitioner’s legal residence or principal office address is: 

 

 

 

 

 

13. 

This appeal involves issues relating to the (check all that are applicable): 

________the property or properties’ true cash and taxable values 

________the property or properties’ taxable value only 

If the property or properties’ taxable value is at issue, is there a 

dispute as to the value of an addition or loss? ___ Yes ___No 

________uniformity of the property or properties’ assessment 

________the property or the properties’ exemption from ad valorem taxation 

 under MCL ______ 

 

14. 

The tax year(s) at issue are: _______________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TO BE ASSIGNED

Not applicable; no protest was made or required.

Not applicable; appeal is timely submitted.

Tuscola

1303 Sugar Tree Court

Caro, MI 48723

City of Caro through Tuscola County Equalization Department.

1303 Sugar Tree Court

Caro, MI 48723

X

X

2025

Page 3

MTT Docket No. _________________ 

Page 3 of 4 

 

15. 

If more than the current tax year is being appealed, list the separate and specific 

facts upon which Petitioner relies to invoke the Tribunal’s authority over the prior 

tax year or years (attach additional page if necessary): 

 

 

 

 

 

16. 

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 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

17. 

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

 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value

Page 4

MTT

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

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

Entire Tribunal Case Information Sheet - Petitioner

MOAHR DOCKET NO. 

Section 1: Petitioner’s Contact Information

Filer type: Organization

First Name/Company Name

M.I.

Last Name

Sugar Tree MV LLC

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

PO Box 349

City or Town

Canal Fulton

State

Ohio

ZIP Code

44614

Telephone Number

248-379-6566

Fax Number

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

nick@shsgrp.com

Section 2: Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information

First Name

Nicholas

M.I.

J

Last Name

LeFevre

Firm Name (if any)

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

6120 Trumbull

City or Town

Detroit

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48208

Telephone Number

313-583-4200

Fax Number

313-583-4201

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

nick@shsgrp.com

Section 5: Issue

Please designate one: 

Valuation – Fill out Sections 4, 5, & 6 below

Section 6: Subject Property Information

How many parcels are you 

appealing?1

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

1303 Sugar Tree Court

Caro

Michigan

48723

Taxing Authority (City or Township)

City Of Caro (TUSCOLA)

County

Tuscola

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.)

Page 2

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

Section 7: Check which of the following you are appealing (check all that apply)

True Cash and Taxable Values

Section 8: Valuation Information for Each Parcel under Appeal

Parcel Number:

050-035-000-3100-00

Classification of Property: Real 

Commercial

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

1700900

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

1700900

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

1098964

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

549482

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

Section 9: Assessment Information

Type of Tax Assessment(s):

Assessment Number(s):

Check all that is being appealed: 

Check what action prompted this appeal:

If “other,” please explain:

Section 10: Special Assessment Information

Type of Special Assessment:

Did you protest the special assessment at the hearing held to confirm the special assessment roll? 

If Yes, what was the date of the hearing held to confirm the special assessment roll?

If No, please explain:

Section 11: Classification Information

Parcel Number:

Current Classification of Property as established by Board of Review: 

What do you believe is the property’s classification?

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

If improved property, how is the property currently being used?

If improved property, for what use was the property designed?

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.

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

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.