Tf Capital, LLC Petitioner Vs. City Of Royal Oak 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

NOTICE OF JULY 1- 15, 2027 PREHEARING GENERAL CALL AND ORDER OF 

PROCEDURE

TF Capital, LLC,

Petitioner,

v

 

 

City Of Royal Oak,

Respondent.

 MTT Docket No. 26-000432

Please be advised that 26-000432 has been placed on a two-week Prehearing General 

Call commencing July 01, 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covered by the order will not be published.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. 26-000432

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 March 4, 2027. 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 March 4, 2027. 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 

March 4, 2027, which means all discovery has been requested, all Motions to Compel 

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

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

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

during “Pre-Valuation Disclosure” discovery.

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

July 1, 2027, which means all discovery has been requested, all Motions to Compel 

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

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

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

opposing party’s Prehearing Statement.

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

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

certain prehearing conference at any time subsequent to the completion date for this 

Prehearing General Call. Parties will, however, be notified in writing approximately one 

week before they are scheduled to appear. 

By:_____________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: August 3, 2026

Page 3

MTT Docket No. 26-000432

Page 3 of 3

PROOF OF SERVICE

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

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

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

representatives.

By: Tribunal Clerk

Page 4

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA

DIRECTOR

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

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

NOTICE OF JULY 1- 15, 2027 PREHEARING GENERAL CALL AND ORDER OF 

PROCEDURE

TF Capital,

Page 5

MTT

Page 6

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 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

TF CAPITAL, LLC, 

Petitioner, 

v 

CITY OF ROYAL OAK, 

Respondent. 

Docket No. 26-000432 

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

JOSEPH M. ROGOWSKI (P51316) 

FRIEDLAENDER NYKANAN 

ROGOWSKI PLC 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

1700 W. Big Beaver, Suite 220 

(248) 629-0880

LAURA M. HALLAHAN (P42101) 

SETH A. O’LOUGHLIN (P80257) 

KELSEA M. MELCHER (P85821) 

HALLAHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 

Attorneys for Respondent 

1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302 

(248) 731-3089

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

ANSWER TO PETITION 

AND 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

ANSWER 

Respondent, City of Royal Oak, by and through its attorneys, Hallahan & Associates, P.C., 

responds to the allegations made in Petitioner’s Petition as follows: 

1.

Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 1.

2.

Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 2.

3.

Upon information and belief, Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 3.

4.

Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations in Paragraph 4 for the reason

that no statement is made and, thus, no responsive pleading is required. 

5.

Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations in Paragraph 5 for the reason

that no statement is made and, thus, no responsive pleading is required.

Page 2

Entire Tribunal Property Tax Answer 

Page 2 of 6 

6.

Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 6.

7.

Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations in Paragraph 7 for the reason

that no statement is made and, thus, no responsive pleading is required. 

8.

Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations in Paragraph 8 for the reason

that no statement is made and, thus, no responsive pleading is required. 

9.

Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations in Paragraph 9 for the reason

that no statement is made and, thus, no responsive pleading is required. 

10.

Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 10 in regard to parcel no. 25-16-

183-018.

11.

Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 11.

12.

Respondent lacks knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the

truth of the allegations in set forth in Paragraph 12 and, therefore, leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

13.

Respondent acknowledges Petitioner’s beliefs as the issues relevant to this appeal

but denies said issues have merit. Moreover, Respondent denies Petitioner is entitled to any 

relief. 

14.

Respondent acknowledges Petitioner’s belief as to an issue with the 2026 tax year

but denies any issue with the identified tax year. 

15.

Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations in Paragraph 15 for the

reason that no statement is made and, thus, no responsive pleading is required. 

16.

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

Board of Review for the 2026 tax year are: 

Parcel No. 

True Cash Value 

Assessed Value 

Taxable Value 

72-25-16-183-018

$365,580 

 $182,790 

$181,950 

72-25-16-183-019

$303,460 

$151,730 

$143,500 

72-25-16-183-020

$348,320 

$174,160 

$153,160 

17.

Respondent contends that the values for the property identified above for the 2026

tax year are: 

Parcel No. 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

72-25-16-183-018

 $365,580 

 $182,790 

$181,950 

72-25-16-183-019

$303,460 

$151,730 

$143,500 

72-25-16-183-020

$348,320 

$174,160 

$153,160

Page 3

Entire Tribunal Property Tax Answer 

Page 3 of 6 

18.

The values in dispute for the property identified above for the 2026 tax year are:

Parcel No. 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

72-25-16-183-018

$0 

$0 

$0 

72-25-16-183-019

$0 

$0 

$0 

72-25-16-183-020

$0 

$0 

$0 

19.

Respondent acknowledges the relief sought by Petitioner via Paragraph 19 but

denies Petitioner is entitled to such relief. In further answer, the assessed, state equalized and/or 

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

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

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

constitutional. 

20.

Respondent denies the allegations in Paragraph 20 for the reason that the same are

untrue. In further answer, the assessed, state equalized and/or taxable values do not exceed 

permitted amounts, do not exceed the percentage for true cash value permitted by law, were 

correctly determined and are based upon correct application of proper principals, and the values 

and Respondent’s mode of assessment are non-discriminatory and constitutional. 

WHEREFORE, Respondent, City of Royal Oak, requests the Tribunal dismiss the 

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

equalization, and award Respondent its costs and attorney fees. 

HALLAHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 

/s/Laura M. Hallahan______________ 

LAURA M. HALLAHAN (P42101) 

SETH A. O’LOUGHLIN (P80257) 

KELSEA M. MELCHER (P85821) 

Attorneys for Respondent 

1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302 

Dated: June 24, 2026 

(248) 731-3089

Page 4

Entire Tribunal Property Tax Answer 

Page 4 of 6 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

Respondent, City of Royal Oak, asserts the following affirmative defenses: 

1.

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

against Respondent and to support its claim for relief. 

2.

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

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

(1981). 

3.

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

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

4.

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

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

Page 5

Entire

Page 6

Ent

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

Entire Tribunal Case Information Sheet - Respondent

MTT DOCKET NO. 26-000432

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact Information

Filer Type: 

Local Unit of Government

Local Unit of Government

City Of Royal Oak (OAKLAND)

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

Laura

M.I.

Last Name

Hallahan

Firm Name (if any)

Hallahan & Associates PC

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

1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202

City or Town

Bloomfield Hills

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48302

Telephone Number

248-731-3089

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

mtt@hallahanlaw.com

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

Respondent or Authorized Attorney/Representative’s Signature: 

/s/Kelsea M. Melcher

/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 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

TF CAPITAL, LLC, 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 26-000432 

Parcel ID Nos.: 72-25-16-183-018, 72-25-

16-183-019, 72-25-16-183-020 

v. 

 

CITY OF ROYAL OAK 

 

 

Respondent. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Joseph M. Rogowski (P51316) 

 

 

 

FRIEDLAENDER NYKANEN 

 

 

 

& ROGOWSKI PLC 

 

 

 

 

 

1700 W. Big Beaver, Ste. 220 

 

 

 

Troy, MI 48084 

 

 

 

 

 

(248) 629-0880 

 

 

 

 

 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

 

Joseph M. Rogowski states that on the 26th of May, 2026, he did forward copies of TF 

Capital, LLC’s Petition, Multiple Parcel Petition Form and Proof of Service to: 

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL: 

 

Clerk 

City of Royal Oak 

203 S. Troy St. 

Royal Oak, MI 48067 

 

Assessor 

City of Royal Oak 

203 S. Troy St. 

Royal Oak, MI 48067 

 

VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL: 

Clerk, Oakland County 

1200 N. Telegraph Road 

Building 12E 

Pontiac, MI 48341

Page 2

Equalization Director 

Oakland County 

250 Elizabeth Lake Road 

Suite 1000 W 

Pontiac, MI 48341 

 

School Board Secretary 

Royal Oak Public Schools 

800 DeVillen 

Royal Oak, MI 48073 

 

State Treasurer 

State of Michigan 

Austin Building 

430 W. Allegan Street 

Lansing, MI 48922 

 

 

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

belief. MCR 2.114(B)(2)(b). 

 

 

/s/Joseph M. Rogowski 

 

 

Joseph M. Rogowski 

 

 

 

Dated: May 26, 2026

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

1 of 1

Docket #: 26-000432

Party Filing Document

Party Filing Document: 

 Petitioner

 Petitioner

 

 

If 'other', Identify: 

File

Document Type: 

 

 

fuFile:

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 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

TF Capital, LLC 

Petitioner(s) 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

MTT Docket No. 

City of Royal Oak 

Respondent(s) 

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION 

1. 

Property Parcel No: 72-25-16-183-018 

(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 

X real personal. 

3. 

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

contiguous? X__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): 

N/A 

6. 

The property identified above is classified as Commercial

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 

Page 2 of 4 

8. 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

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): 

N/A 

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): 

N/A 

The property or properties at issue are located in Oakland 

County. The 

property or properties’ address is: 

1202 Catalpa Dr, Royal Oak, MI 48067 

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

local governmental unit): City of Royal Oak 

Petitioner's legal residence or principal office address is: 

550 P.O. Box 550, Royal Oak, MI 48068 

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

X 

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

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 

lox yar or years (attach additional page if necessary): 

N 

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 

2026 

$365,580 

$182,790 

$181,950 

17. 

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

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

$180,000 

$90,000 

$90,000 

18. 

The values in dispute for the property identified above are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

$185,580 

$92,790 

$91,950 

19. 

Petitioner requests the following relief (attach additional page if necessary): 

$90,000 respectively for each so that the subject properties assessed and taxable 

values reflect 50% of the subject property's true cash value as required by Const. 

1963, Art. IX, Sec. 3 and Sec. 27 of the General Property Tax Act being MCL 211.27.

Page 4

MTT Docket No. 

Page 4 of 4 

Signature of Petitioner's Authorized 

ive or, if none, Petitioner: 

Pented Name of Petitioner's Authorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: 

Joseph M. Rogowski 

Email Address: jrogowski@fnrplc.com 

Mailing Address: 

1700 W. Big Beaver Rd., Ste. 220, Troy, MI 48084 

Telephone Number: (248)629-0880 

Date: =/21)2026

Page 5

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

LANSING 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

MARLON 

|. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

DIRECTOR 

TF Capital, LLC 

Petitioner, 

, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

v 

MTT Docket No. 

City of Royal Oak 

Respondent. 

MULTIPLE PARCEL PETITIONFORM 1 

OF 1 

1. 

The classification of the property identified herein as established by 

Respondent's Board of Review is: 

Tax Year 

Parcel Number 

Real/Personal 

Classification 

2026 

72-25-16-183-019 

Real 

Commercial 

2026 

72-25-16-183-020 

Real 

Commercial 

2. 

The values for the property identified herein as established by Respondent's 

Board of Review are: 

Tax Year 

| Parcel Number 

| True Cash Value 

| Assessed Value 

| Taxable Value 

2026 

72-25-16-183-019($303,460 

$151,730 

$143,500 

2026 

72-25-16-183-020($348,320 

$174,160 

$153,160

Page 6

MTT Docket No. 

Page 2 of 2 

3. 

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

Tax Year | Parcel Number | True Cash Value | State Equalized Value | Taxable Value 

2026 

72-25-16-183-01{$180,000 

$90,000 

$90,000 

2026 

72-25-16-183-02($180,000 

$90,000 

$90,000 

4. 

The values in dispute for the property identified herein are: 

Tax Year 

Parcel Number 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

2026 

72-25-16-183-01 $180,000 

$61,730 

$53,500 

72-25-16-183-02 $180,000 

$84,160 

$63,160

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

TF Capital, LLC, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

v

MTT Docket No.: 26-000432

City Of Royal Oak, 

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: May 19, 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 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

TF Capital, LLC 

Petitioner(s) 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

MTT Docket No. 

City of Royal Oak 

Respondent(s) 

ENTIRE TRIBUNAL PROPERTY TAX PETITION 

1. 

Property Parcel No: 72-25-16-183-018 

(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 

X real personal. 

3. 

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

contiguous? X__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): 

N/A 

6. 

The property identified above is classified as Commercial

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 

Page 2 of 4 

8. 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

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): 

N/A 

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): 

N/A 

The property or properties at issue are located in Oakland 

County. The 

property or properties’ address is: 

1202 Catalpa Dr, Royal Oak, MI 48067 

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

local governmental unit): City of Royal Oak 

Petitioner's legal residence or principal office address is: 

550 P.O. Box 550, Royal Oak, MI 48068 

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

X 

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

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 

lox yar or years (attach additional page if necessary): 

N 

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 

2026 

$365,580 

$182,790 

$181,950 

17. 

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

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

$180,000 

$90,000 

$90,000 

18. 

The values in dispute for the property identified above are: 

Tax Year 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

2025 

$185,580 

$92,790 

$91,950 

19. 

Petitioner requests the following relief (attach additional page if necessary): 

$90,000 respectively for each so that the subject properties assessed and taxable 

values reflect 50% of the subject property's true cash value as required by Const. 

1963, Art. IX, Sec. 3 and Sec. 27 of the General Property Tax Act being MCL 211.27.

Page 4

MTT Docket No. 

Page 4 of 4 

Signature of Petitioner's Authorized 

ive or, if none, Petitioner: 

Pented Name of Petitioner's Authorized Representative or, if none, Petitioner: 

Joseph M. Rogowski 

Email Address: jrogowski@fnrplc.com 

Mailing Address: 

1700 W. Big Beaver Rd., Ste. 220, Troy, MI 48084 

Telephone Number: (248)629-0880 

Date: =/21)2026

Page 5

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

LANSING 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

MARLON 

|. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

DIRECTOR 

TF Capital, LLC 

Petitioner, 

, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

v 

MTT Docket No. 

City of Royal Oak 

Respondent. 

MULTIPLE PARCEL PETITIONFORM 1 

OF 1 

1. 

The classification of the property identified herein as established by 

Respondent's Board of Review is: 

Tax Year 

Parcel Number 

Real/Personal 

Classification 

2026 

72-25-16-183-019 

Real 

Commercial 

2026 

72-25-16-183-020 

Real 

Commercial 

2. 

The values for the property identified herein as established by Respondent's 

Board of Review are: 

Tax Year 

| Parcel Number 

| True Cash Value 

| Assessed Value 

| Taxable Value 

2026 

72-25-16-183-019($303,460 

$151,730 

$143,500 

2026 

72-25-16-183-020($348,320 

$174,160 

$153,160

Page 6

MTT Docket No. 

Page 2 of 2 

3. 

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

Tax Year | Parcel Number | True Cash Value | State Equalized Value | Taxable Value 

2026 

72-25-16-183-01{$180,000 

$90,000 

$90,000 

2026 

72-25-16-183-02($180,000 

$90,000 

$90,000 

4. 

The values in dispute for the property identified herein are: 

Tax Year 

Parcel Number 

True Cash Value 

State Equalized Value 

Taxable Value 

2026 

72-25-16-183-01 $180,000 

$61,730 

$53,500 

72-25-16-183-02 $180,000 

$84,160 

$63,160

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

TF Capital, LLC

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

1700 W. Big Beaver Rd.

Suite 220

City or Town

Troy

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48084

Telephone Number

248-629-0880

Fax Number

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

jrogowski@fnrplc.com

Section 2: Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information

First Name

Joseph

M.I.

M

Last Name

Rogowski

Firm Name (if any)

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

1700 W. Big Beaver Road, Suite 350

City or Town

Troy

State

Michigan

ZIP Code

48084

Telephone Number

248-629-0880

Fax Number

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

jrogowski@fnrplc.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?3

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

1202 Catalpa Dr., Royal Oak, MI 48067

1114 Catalpa Dr., Royal Oak, MI 48067

1112 Catalpa Dr., Royal Oak, MI 48067

Michigan

Taxing Authority (City or Township)

City Of Royal Oak (OAKLAND)

County

Oakland

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

(*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:

72-25-16-183-018

Classification of Property: Real 

Commercial

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

182790

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

181950

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

180000

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

90000

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

Parcel Number:

72-25-16-183-019

Classification of Property: Real 

Commercial

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

151730

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

143500

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

180000

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

90000

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

Parcel Number:

72-25-16-183-020

Classification of Property: Real 

Commercial

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

174160

Current Taxable Value as established by the Board of Review:

153160

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

180000

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

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

90000

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? 

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.

Page 4

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

ORLENE HAWKS

DIRECTOR

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/ Joseph M. Rogowski

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.