Michigan

Thomas Hutchinson, Mary Hutchinson, Petitioners V Township Of Lake, Respondent

Petitioner: Thomas Hutchinson, Mary Hutchinson
Respondent: Township Of Lake

Case overview

Docket number: 25-003653-TT
Status: Disposed
CaseType: SC Property
Division: Small Claims Division
County: Benzie
Judge: No judge assigned

Docket history

Line #	Subject	Filer	Line Ref	Enter Date/Post Mark	Fee	Related Item
11	Order of Dismissal	Not recorded	Not recorded	03/09/2026	Not recorded	Download
10	Order Setting Aside R Default	Not recorded	Not recorded	02/27/2026	Not recorded	Download
9	Notice of Filing	Not recorded	Not recorded	02/27/2026	Not recorded	Download
8	Response to Order - Answer	RESP	6	02/04/2026	Not recorded	Download
7	Order of Partial Dismissal	Not recorded	Not recorded	01/22/2026	Not recorded	Download
6	Order Holding Respondent in Default	Not recorded	Not recorded	01/22/2026	Not recorded	Download
5	Order Extending P's Default	Not recorded	4	01/22/2026	Not recorded	Download
4	Order of Default of Petitioner	Not recorded	Not recorded	10/23/2025	Not recorded	Download
3	Petition has been verified	PET	1	10/23/2025	Not recorded	Download
2	Notice of Docket Number SC	Not recorded	Not recorded	10/23/2025	Not recorded	Download
1	A petition was received.	PET	Not recorded	08/20/2025	$200.00	Download

Documents

25-003653.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

Thomas Hutchinson and Mary Hutchinson,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

Petitioners,

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

MTT Docket No. 25-003653

Lake Township,

Presiding Judge

Respondent.

Patricia L. Halm

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The Tribunal has considered the file in this case and finds that Petitioners were placed

in default on October 23, 2025, because Petitioners failed to file a copy of the notice

giving rise to the appeal. On January 22, 2026, the Tribunal extended the time for

Petitioners to cure the default by an additional 14 days, and they have failed to respond.

Petitioners have not complied with either order, and the latter stated that “failure to

comply with this order may result in the dismissal of the case” and referenced Grimm v

Dep’t of Treasury.1 In Grimm, the Michigan Court of Appeals summarized factors that

the Tribunal should consider before imposing the sanction of dismissal. Those factors

are:

(1) whether the violation was wilful or accidental; (2) the party's history of

refusing to comply with previous court orders; (3) the prejudice to the

opposing party; (4) whether there exists a history of deliberate delay; (5) the

degree of compliance with other parts of the court's orders; (6) attempts to

cure the defect; and (7) whether a lesser sanction would better serve the

interests of justice.2

Here, Petitioners’ failure to comply with multiple orders has established a history of

deliberate delay. As a result, giving careful consideration to the factors involved and

considering all options in determining what sanction is just and proper, the Tribunal

finds that dismissal is appropriate, and a lesser sanction would not be appropriate in

light of Petitioners’ history of noncompliance in this case.

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED.

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

1 Grimm v Dep’t of Treasury, 291 Mich App 140 (2010).

2 Id. at 149.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003653 

Page 2 of 2 

 

APPEAL RIGHTS 

If you disagree with the final decision in this case, you may file a motion for 

reconsideration with the Tribunal or a claim of appeal with the Michigan Court of 

Appeals. 

 

A motion for reconsideration must be filed with the Tribunal with the required filing fee 

within 21 days from the date of entry of the final decision. Because the final decision 

closes the case, the motion cannot be filed through the Tribunal’s web-based e-filing 

system; it must be filed by mail or personal service. The fee for the filing of such 

motions is $50.00 in the Entire Tribunal and $25.00 in the Small Claims Division, unless 

the Small Claims decision relates to the valuation of property and the property had a 

principal residence exemption of at least 50% at the time the petition was filed or the 

decision relates to the grant or denial of a poverty or disabled veterans exemption and, 

if so, there is no filing fee. You are required to serve a copy of the motion on the 

opposing party by mail or personal service or by email if the opposing party agrees to 

electronic service, and proof demonstrating that service must be submitted with the 

motion. Responses to motions for reconsideration are prohibited and there are no oral 

arguments unless otherwise ordered by the Tribunal. 

 

Alternatively, you may file a claim of appeal with the Michigan Court of Appeals. If the 

claim is filed within 21 days of the entry of the final decision, it is an “appeal of right.” If 

the claim is filed more than 21 days after the entry of the final decision, it is an “appeal 

by leave.” A copy of the claim of appeal must be filed with the Tribunal to certify the 

record on appeal. There is no certification fee. 

 

 

Entered: March 9, 2026 

 

 

 

By _____________________________ 

kac 

 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

 

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

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

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

representatives. 

 

By: Tribunal Clerk

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

Order_Setting_Aside_R_Default.2026-02-27_09-43-36.0000.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

Thomas Hutchinson,Mary Hutchinson, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003653

Township Of Lake,

Respondent.

ORDER SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT

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

Respondent was held in default on January 22, 2026, and the default has been timely 

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

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

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

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the Default is SET ASIDE.

By_________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: February 27, 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

Thomas Hutchinson,Mary Hutchinson, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003653

Township Of Lake,

Respondent.

ORDER SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT

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

Respondent was held in default on January 22, 2026, and the default has been timely 

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

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

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

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the Default is SET ASIDE.

By_________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: February 27, 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 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA

DIRECTOR

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

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

Thomas Hutchinson,Mary Hutchinson, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-003653

Township Of Lake,

Respondent.

ORDER SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT

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

Respondent was held in default on January 22, 2026, and the default has been timely 

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

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

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

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the Default is SET ASIDE.

By_________________________________

Patricia L. Halm, Tribunal Chair

Entered: February 27, 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.

SC-Notice_of_Filing_of_Answer.2026-02-27_09-40-44.0000.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

Thomas Hutchinson,Mary Hutchinson,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

MTT Docket No. 25-003653

Township Of Lake,

Respondent.

NOTICE OF FILING

TAKE NOTICE that a Small Claims answer has been filed and the electronic copy of the

answer can be reviewed by utilizing the Docket Lookup on the Tribunal’s website.

Unless Respondent was defaulted, this case is ready to be scheduled for a Small

Claims hearing and will be scheduled in the normal course of scheduling. You will

receive a Notice of Hearing from the Tribunal by e-mail if you have identified an email

address in the petition or other documentation. The Notice of Hearing will inform you of

the date, time, and location of your hearing (note that your hearing will likely be

conducted by telephone). Please read the Notice of Hearing as it includes important

information.

EVIDENCE: Parties are required to submit all evidence to the Tribunal and send a copy

to the opposing party at least 21 days before the hearing date even if the documents

had been submitted to the local Board of Review or the Michigan Department of

Treasury. If the documents are not timely submitted to the Tribunal and served on the

opposing party, the documents may be excluded. Documents may be filed with the

Tribunal by mail or through the Tribunal’s e-filing system. Documents may be sent to the

opposing party by mail or by e-mail, if the parties agree to service by e-mail.

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

documents are public records and will appear for public viewing on the Tax

Docket Lookup. Users who file documents are responsible for ensuring sensitive or

personal identifying information is withheld or redacted. See TTR 209. If a user wishes

to file a document for consideration by the Michigan Tax 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.

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

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003653

Page 2 of 6

submitting a Request for Redactions. The Request for Redactions form will be

available on the Entire Tribunal and Small Claims pages of our website.

Alternate Dispute Resolution Options

INFORMAL SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE: Parties have the option of handling this

case through an informal settlement conference. An informal settlement conference

is a meeting between the parties and/or their representatives to discuss the issues in a

case in an effort to settle the case. This process may be an alternative to a hearing with

a judge and may result in the parties’ filing a Joint Stipulation for Entry of Consent

Judgment. Visit the Tribunal’s ADR webpage for more information.

NOTE: The parties may not request an informal settlement conference to discuss an

appeal of a principal residence exemption that was denied by either the Michigan

Department of Treasury or a County. Also, state taxes levied by the Michigan

Department of Treasury, such as income taxes, are not subject to the informal

settlement conference process.

MEDIATION: Parties have the option of handling this case through mediation.

Mediation is a voluntary process where a mediator facilitates communication between

the parties, assists in identifying issues, and helps explore solutions to promote a

mutually acceptable settlement. This process may be an alternative to a hearing with a

judge and may result in the parties’ filing a Joint Stipulation for Entry of Consent

Judgment. Visit the Tribunal’s ADR webpage for more information.

If you have any questions, please contact the Tribunal by phone at (517) 335-9760 or

email taxtrib@michigan.gov.

By: Tribunal Clerk

Entered: February 27, 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 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN

GRETCHEN WHITMER

GOVERNOR

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

LANSING

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA

DIRECTOR

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

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

Thomas Hutchinson,Mary Hutchinson,

Petitioner,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

v 

MTT Docket No. 25-003653

Township Of

Page 4

MTT Docket No.

Page 5

STATE

Page 6

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.

25-003653.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

n= ~EIVED 

. 

FEB 

0 4 2026 

: 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

ij(_ raised TAX TRIBUNAL 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLO LBRO, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL ANSWER FORM 

VALUATION / UNCAPPING 

MTT DOCKET NO. 25-003653 

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact information 

Unit of Government 

Lake Township 

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

City or Town: 

State: 

ZIP Code: 

Telephone Number: 

Email Address {do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via email): 

Section 2: Respondent’s Attorney/Authorized Representative’s Contact Information 

} 

First Name: 

M.L: 

Last Name: 

Gunnar 

P 

Brow 

Firm Name {if any): 

Mailing Address {No., Street, P.O. Box or Rural Route): 

5153 Scenic Hwy 

City or Town: 

Honor 

Telephone Number: 2 3 1 -227- 1 1 09 

Email Address (do not enter unless you want MTT to send all correspondence via email): 

gpbmichiganassessing@yahoo.com 

State: 

ZIP Code: 

Ml 

[49640 

Section 3: Subject Property Information 

Are the parcels listed by Petitioner contiguous or adjoining? 

if no, fist all parcels that are adjoining in separate groupings. Attach a 

separate sheet if necessary. 

[J Yes 

No 

[1 Not Applicable 

Does the subject property have a Principal Residence Exemption of 50% or more for all tax years at issue? 

[7 Yes 

No

Page 2

pes, 

VE 

¥ 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON I. BROWN, DPA 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

Section 4: Explain Your Answer to this Appeal 

See Attachment 

Section 5: Jurisdictional Issues 

IF PETITIONER IS APPEALING THE TRUE CASH AND/OR TAXABLE VALUES 

Did Petitioner protest the assessment at a Board of Review (BOR)? [0] Yes 

[7] No 

If yes, check which BOR Petitioner attended: [] March 

[] July 

[J] December 

If the July or December BOR revised the assessment(s) at issue, did it have authority? [0] Yes 

[mm] No 

If yes, cite the Board's authority. 

Was the assessment at issue established as the result of a clerical error or mutual mistake of fact? [J Yes 

No 

If yes, explain 

Is Petitioner appealing from a State Tax Commission Order? 

[J ves 

No 

If so, what is the issue date? 

IF PETITIONER IS APPEALING THE UNCAPPING OF TAXABLE VALUE 

When was the Notice of Uncapping, if applicable, issued? 

77. / 7 

] 22> 

ZN 2% (BN 

Under what statutory section was the Taxable Value uncapped? 

Section 6: Valuation Information use the muttiple parcel form for additional, contiguous parcels. 

Parcel Number: 1 0-028-008-00 

Classification of Property: 

~~ Real 

Personal [] (check one) 

l [J 

Commercial] 

Industrial] 

Residential @ 

 Timber-Cutover 

[1 

~~ Developmental 

[J 

Utility 

[J (check one)

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING SYSTEM 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

filam 

coin. Wociz 4 Nanas, 

Petitioner(s) 

MTT Docket 

No. 25 

29 >C 53 

v 

Late wham 

AL [=] 

A 

Respondent(s) 

PROOF 

OF SERVICE 

ER" iy 

TT 

states that on 

_/ / z% | Zé 

he/she 

[Name of person serving/mailing petition] 

[date of service] 

served a copy of the Aas Os 

relative to the above-captioned matter upon: 

POL 

TIP 

I, Cpe & 

HAebinson 

Meo 7 

Xx Thovw eS 

P Rox BZHT 

0 Thon, Io 

fan 

Lan Sine ANT YT 705 -F732 

Fron ir, ME 

LEE 

[Provide name and address of the party/people being served] 

ND 

[Signature of person who is serving/mailing copy] 

Ema 

VD. 

[iS ya J 

0 

) 

[Print/type name of person serving/mailing copy]

Page 4

Respondent Answer Attachment

Docket: 25-003653

8/8/24 a death certificate for the last remaining owner, Raymond G. Tate was submitted to the

Lake Township Assessor. The death certificate was entered as a transfer of ownership and

uncapped as no other documentation was submitted.

Assessment change notice was mailed to the representative, John Uplinger of the Raymond Tate

Estate on 2/20/25. Copy of returned change notices have been provided to verify mail date. No

appeal of the valuation or uncapping was submitted by the representative.

The petitioner purchased the property 5/7/2025 from an estate sale for $435,000. Upon receipt

of the summer tax bill for 2025 the petitioners contacted the assessor to request an inspection

as they believed the valuation/taxes were too high. Assessor met the petitioners on 9/17/2025

and together inspected and photographed the property.

Petitioners were informed that assessor had no authority to change the assessed value for the

current year and that the previous owner did not appeal to the March Board of Review.

Petitioners filed appeal based on the summer tax bill being the first documentation received

“giving rise” to an increase in assessed and taxable value.

Upon inspection assessor adjusted the subject property finding several discrepancies and

deferred maintenance. Including but not limited to sizable cracks in the foundation wall, rotted

decking boards, missing and aged shingles. Due to the changes assessor is of the opinion that

had an inspection been performed prior to the sale and 2025 tax season a decrease in value

would have been warranted.

Based on the deferred maintenance assessor is of the opinion the that a reduction on value is

warranted. A revised 2025 Valuation Report has been provided with adjustments for reference.

True Cash Value of the subject property after adjustments have been $560,513 according to the

sales and ECF studies applied to Lake Township.

Gunnar Brow,

Page 5

00-800~-820~01 

AH

Page 6

Page 7

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

25-003653 P Ex Def R def SC no ans.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

Thomas Hutchinson and Mary Hutchinson,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

Petitioners,

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

MTT Docket No. 25-003653

Lake Township,

Presiding Judge

Respondent.

Patricia L. Halm

ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR PETITIONERS TO CURE DEFAULT

ORDER HOLDING RESPONDENT IN DEFAULT

ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL

The Tribunal has considered the file in this case and finds that it entered an order

holding Petitioners in default on October 23, 2025, because they failed to file a copy of

the notice giving rise to the appeal, i.e., notice related to the uncapping of the subject

property.1 Petitioners were required to cure the default by obtaining a copy of the notice

related to the uncapping of the subject property from Respondent and submit a copy to

the Tribunal within 14 days. Petitioners have had ample time to comply, yet have failed

to respond or submit the required filings. Though the Tribunal finds an extension of time

to cure the default appropriate, Petitioners’ failure to comply with Tribunal orders and its

Rules of Practice and Procedure has established a history of deliberate delay that would

justify the dismissal of the case for failure to timely comply with this order.2

Additionally, the Tribunal finds that Respondent has failed to file an answer. See TTR

281. Respondent must file an answer within 14 days of the entry of this order. Tribunal

rules and Small Claims answer forms can be found on our website at

www.michigan.gov/taxtrib.

Furthermore, the Tribunal finds that Petitioners’ appeal includes an appeal of the

classification of the subject property. The Tribunal has no jurisdiction over Petitioners’

classification claim because Petitioners were required to “notify the assessor and []

protest the assigned classification to the March board of review.” Additionally, “[a]n

owner . . . may appeal the decision of the March board of review by filing a petition with

the state tax commission not later than June 30 in that tax year.”3 As such, the Tribunal

is not the proper venue for a classification claim brought forward by a property owner.

Therefore,

1 The order further stated, “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).”

2 See Grimm v Dep’t of Treasury, 291 Mich App 140 (2010).

3 MCL 211.34c(6). (Emphasis added.)

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-003653

Page 2 of 2

IT IS ORDERED that the time for Petitioners to cure the default is EXTENDED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioners must complete the following to cure the

default: (1) file a copy of the notice related to the uncapping of the subject property

issued by Respondent, (2) file a Motion to Set Aside Default, (3) pay the $25.00 fee

required for the filing of the motion, and (4) file proof the motion was served on

Respondent. The foregoing must be filed with the Tribunal within 14 days of the entry of

this order.4

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent is held in DEFAULT.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent must do the following to cure the default:

file an answer. The foregoing must be filed with the Tribunal within 14 days of the entry

of this order.

Failure to comply with this order may result in dismissal of the case, as provided by TTR

237, or Respondent being required to file a Motion to Set Aside Default with the

applicable filing fee, as provided by TTR 231.5

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioners’ classification appeal only is DISMISSED.

Entered: January 22, 2026

By _____________________________

kac

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

4 “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).

5 See also MCL 205.732.