Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, Petitioner Vs. Township Of Garfield, Respondent

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, 

 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

v 

 

Garfield Township, 

 

 

 

Respondent. 

 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002387 

 

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

DANIEL L. STANLEY (P57052) 

JACKIE J. COOK (P68781) 

HONIGMAN LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

2290 First National Building 

660 Woodward Avenue 

Detroit, MI 48226-3506 

(313) 465-7270 

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 

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

RESPONDENT’S RESPONSE TO PETITIONER’S MOTION 

TO AMEND PETITION TO CONTEST 2026 ASSESSED, 

STATE EQUALIZED, AND TAXABLE VALUES 

 

Respondent, Garfield Township, by and through its attorneys, Hallahan & Associates, P.C., 

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

1. 

Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 1. 

2. 

Respondent denies the allegations in Paragraph 2, including subparagraphs (a)-(d), 

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 of true cash value 

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

Page 2

2

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

constitutional. 

3. 

Respondent acknowledges the relief requested by Petitioner in the final paragraph 

of its Motion but denies that Petitioner is entitled to the requested relief due to the statements in 

the above Paragraphs. Respondent incorporates by reference the affirmative defenses set forth in 

its Answer to Petition herein. 

WHEREFORE, Respondent, Garfield Township, requests the Tribunal enter an Order 

denying Petitioner’s Motion to Amend and dismissing the appeal. 

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 17, 2026 

(248) 731-3089 

 

 

 

 

PROOF OF MAILING 

 

On the date below I sent by electronic mail a copy of the foregoing Respondent’s Response to 

Petitioner’s Motion to Amend to: 

 

Daniel L. Stanley 

Honigman LLP 

dstanley@honigman.com 

 

Jackie J. Cook 

Honigman LLP 

jcook@honigman.com 

 

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

 

 

 

/s/ Kelsea M. Melcher____________ 

Dated: June 17, 2026 

Kelsea M. Melcher

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

Docket Number: 25-002387

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

Party Filing Document 

Respondent

Files

Document Type: Response to Motion

Attachment File Name: MTA 26 Response_Walmart Garfield_FINAL

Fee Information

Filing Fee: $ 0.00

Payment Information

Payment: $ 0.00

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

Page 1

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, 

Petitioner, 

MTT Docket No. 25-002387 

v 

Garfield Township, 

Respondent. 

Jackie J. Cook (P68781) 

Daniel L. Stanley (P57052) 

Honigman LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

2290 First National Bldg. 

660 Woodward Avenue 

Detroit, MI 48226-3506 

(313) 465-7270 

jcook@honigman.com

dstanley@honigman.com

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 

lhallahan@hallahanlaw.com

soloughlin@hallahanlaw.com

kmelcher@hallahanlaw.com

Motion to Amend Petition to Contest 

2026 Assessed Value, State Equalized Value, and Taxable Value 

Petitioner, Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, through its attorneys, Honigman LLP, 

moves to amend the Petition in this matter to include the following: 

1.

In 2026, Respondent’s board of review determined the taxable value of 

Petitioner’s Property to be $4,129,669 and Respondent board of review assessed Petitioner’s 

Property at $4,281,800, which will result in a state equalized value of the same amount, based 

upon the tentative equalization factor. 

2.

The 2026 assessment – including the state equalized and taxable values – 

imposed on Petitioner's Property, the taxes to be levied and collected on Petitioner’s Property, and

Page 2

75737162.1 

the mode of assessment adopted by Respondent are invalid, unlawful, and operate as a fraud on 

Petitioner, because they 

a.

Exceed amounts permitted by the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes; 

b. Are calculated at or derived from higher percentages of true cash value than 

permissible under the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes; 

c.

Are based on the application of wrong principles and an erroneous determination 

of the true cash value of that portion of Petitioner's Property that is taxable under 

Michigan law, if any; and 

d. Discriminate against Petitioner and deny Petitioner its constitutional rights to 

uniformity, equal protection, and due process of law. 

WHEREFORE, Petitioner moves that this Motion be granted, and Petitioner requests that 

the Tribunal enter an Order: (i) reducing the 2026 assessed value and state equalized value from 

$4,281,800 to $2,700,000; (ii) reducing the 2026 taxable value from $4,129,669 to $2,700,000; 

(iii) requiring payment to Petitioner of the refunds attributable to such reductions, plus interest and 

costs; and (iv) awarding Petitioner any other relief to which it is entitled. 

Dated: May 28, 2026 

Respectfully submitted, 

Honigman LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

By: _______________________________________ 

Jackie J. Cook (P68781) 

Daniel L. Stanley (P57052) 

2290 First National Bldg. 

660 Woodward Avenue 

Detroit, MI 48226-3506 

(313) 465-7270 

jcook@honigman.com

dstanley@honigman.com

Page 3

75737162.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, 

Petitioner, 

MTT Docket No. 25-002387 

v 

Garfield Township, 

Respondent. 

Jackie J. Cook (P68781) 

Daniel L. Stanley (P57052) 

Honigman LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

2290 First National Bldg. 

660 Woodward Avenue 

Detroit, MI 48226-3506 

(313) 465-7270 

jcook@honigman.com

dstanley@honigman.com

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 

lhallahan@hallahanlaw.com

soloughlin@hallahanlaw.com

kmelcher@hallahanlaw.com

Proof of Service

Lisa Joseph affirms that on May 28, 2026 she served a copy of Petitioner's Motion to 

Amend Petition to Contest 2026 Assessed Value, State Equalized Value, and Taxable Value and 

this Proof of Service in connection with the above-entitled cause upon the following: 

Laura M. Hallahan (P42101) 

Seth A.

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 #: 25-002387

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 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, 

 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

v 

 

Garfield Twp – Grand Traverse, 

 

 

 

Respondent. 

 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002387 

 

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

MICHAEL B. SHAPIRO (P20282) 

DANIEL L. STANLEY (P57052) 

HONIGMAN LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

39400 Woodward Avenue, Suite 101 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304-5151 

(313) 465-7622 

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 

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

 

JOINT MOTION TO HOLD APPEAL IN ABEYANCE PENDING 

MTT DOCKET NO. 24-001173 

 

The parties, by and through their respective counsel, state the following in support of the 

above captioned Motion: 

1. 

The above captioned appeal concerns the 2025 valuation of the big box store 

commonly known as Walmart – Parcel No. 28-05-022-009-20 - located in Grand Traverse County. 

2. 

With the exception of the tax year at issue, the parties, property, and issues raised 

in the above captioned appeal are, based on the pleadings, in essence identical to those at issue in 

MTT Docket No. 24-001173 – an appeal concerning the 2024 tax year. 

3. 

The above captioned 2025 appeal is ready to be placed on a Prehearing General 

Call and Order of Procedure.

Page 2

2

4. 

However, as of the filing of the above captioned Motion, the 2024 matter (MTT 

Docket No. 24-001173) has not yet been resolved. A Prehearing Conference is scheduled for 

December 16-30, 2025, at which time the 2024 matter will be scheduled for hearing. Based on the 

availability of the parties’ expert witnesses, the parties expect the 2024 matter will not be set for 

hearing until early 2026. Accordingly, a Final Opinion and Judgment will likely not be rendered 

until Summer 2026 at the earliest. 

5. 

A Final Opinion and Judgment from the Tribunal regarding MTT Docket No. 24-

001173 could impact this 2025 appeal and the parties’ desire to proceed with this appeal. Thus, it 

could potentially be a waste of time and resources for the parties and the Tribunal to proceed with 

the above captioned appeal when the prior 2024 appeal remains pending. 

6. 

To proceed with this case before a resolution regarding MTT Docket No. 24-

001173 has been reached would likely not constitute an efficient administration of justice. 

7. 

Proceeding with the above captioned appeal will require the parties and the 

Tribunal to expend substantial resources which may ultimately be unnecessary. Placing the above 

captioned appeal in abeyance at this juncture before substantial time and resources have been spent 

– including, but not limited to, the preparation of prehearing statements and valuation disclosures 

– is in the interest of efficiency to all parties involved and judicial economy. 

8. 

As evidenced above, there is good cause for granting this Motion to hold the above 

captioned appeal in abeyance pending the resolution of its 2024 matter, MTT Docket No. 24-

001173. 

WHEREFORE, the parties respectfully request the Tribunal enter an Order holding the 

above captioned appeal in abeyance pending the resolution of MTT Docket No. 24-001173.

Page 3

3

Respectfully submitted, 

HONIGMAN LLP 

 

/s/ Daniel L. Stanley___________________ 

MICHAEL B. SHAPIRO (P20282) 

DANIEL L. STANLEY (P57052) 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

39400 Woodward Avenue, Suite 101 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304-5151 

(313) 465-7622 

 

 

Dated: September 25, 2025 

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 

(248) 731-3089 

 

Dated: September 25, 2025

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 

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002387 

 

Garfield Township, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO HOLD CASE IN ABEYANCE 

 

On September 25, 2025, the parties filed a joint motion requesting that the Tribunal hold 

this case in abeyance pending resolution of Docket No. 24-001173, which is currently 

pending before the Entire Tribunal. In the motion, the parties state that resolution of the 

2024 case may result in an increase of efficiency and judicial economy in this case. 

 

The Tribunal has considered the motion and the case file and finds that placing this 

case in abeyance pending resolution of Docket No. 24-001173 will facilitate the efficient 

administration of justice, as that resolution may have a direct bearing on the outcome of 

the instant appeal. Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that the Joint Motion to Hold Case in Abeyance is GRANTED. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall notify the Tribunal in writing within 28 

days of the resolution of Docket No. 24-001173 as to the need for further proceedings in 

this matter. 

 

 

Entered: September 26, 2025 

 

 

By _____________________________ 

bw 

 

 

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 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, 

 

 

 

Petitioner, 

 

v 

 

Garfield Twp – Grand Traverse, 

 

 

 

Respondent. 

 

 

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002387 

 

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

MICHAEL B. SHAPIRO (P20282) 

DANIEL L. STANLEY (P57052) 

HONIGMAN LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

39400 Woodward Avenue, Suite 101 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304-5151 

(313) 465-7622 

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 

_____________________________________________________________________________/ 

 

 

JOINT MOTION TO HOLD APPEAL IN ABEYANCE PENDING 

MTT DOCKET NO. 24-001173 

 

The parties, by and through their respective counsel, state the following in support of the 

above captioned Motion: 

1. 

The above captioned appeal concerns the 2025 valuation of the big box store 

commonly known as Walmart – Parcel No. 28-05-022-009-20 - located in Grand Traverse County. 

2. 

With the exception of the tax year at issue, the parties, property, and issues raised 

in the above captioned appeal are, based on the pleadings, in essence identical to those at issue in 

MTT Docket No. 24-001173 – an appeal concerning the 2024 tax year. 

3. 

The above captioned 2025 appeal is ready to be placed on a Prehearing General 

Call and Order of Procedure.

Page 2

2

4. 

However, as of the filing of the above captioned Motion, the 2024 matter (MTT 

Docket No. 24-001173) has not yet been resolved. A Prehearing Conference is scheduled for 

December 16-30, 2025, at which time the 2024 matter will be scheduled for hearing. Based on the 

availability of the parties’ expert witnesses, the parties expect the 2024 matter will not be set for 

hearing until early 2026. Accordingly, a Final Opinion and Judgment will likely not be rendered 

until Summer 2026 at the earliest. 

5. 

A Final Opinion and Judgment from the Tribunal regarding MTT Docket No. 24-

001173 could impact this 2025 appeal and the parties’ desire to proceed with this appeal. Thus, it 

could potentially be a waste of time and resources for the parties and the Tribunal to proceed with 

the above captioned appeal when the prior 2024 appeal remains pending. 

6. 

To proceed with this case before a resolution regarding MTT Docket No. 24-

001173 has been reached would likely not constitute an efficient administration of justice. 

7. 

Proceeding with the above captioned appeal will require the parties and the 

Tribunal to expend substantial resources which may ultimately be unnecessary. Placing the above 

captioned appeal in abeyance at this juncture before substantial time and resources have been spent 

– including, but not limited to, the preparation of prehearing statements and valuation disclosures 

– is in the interest of efficiency to all parties involved and judicial economy. 

8. 

As evidenced above, there is good cause for granting this Motion to hold the above 

captioned appeal in abeyance pending the resolution of its 2024 matter, MTT Docket No. 24-

001173. 

WHEREFORE, the parties respectfully request the Tribunal enter an Order holding the 

above captioned appeal in abeyance pending the resolution of MTT Docket No. 24-001173.

Page 3

3

Respectfully submitted, 

HONIGMAN LLP 

 

/s/ Daniel L. Stanley___________________ 

MICHAEL B. SHAPIRO (P20282) 

DANIEL L. STANLEY (P57052) 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

39400 Woodward Avenue, Suite 101 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304-5151 

(313) 465-7622 

 

 

Dated: September 25, 2025 

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 

(248) 731-3089 

 

Dated: September 25, 2025

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

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002387

Township Of Garfield,

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 July 24, 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: August 29, 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

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002387

Township Of Garfield,

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 July 24, 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: August 29, 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

RECEIVED 

AUG 0 1 2025 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

WAL-MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST, 

Petitioner, 

Docket No. 25-002387 

v 

Parcel No. 28-05-022-009-20 

GARFIELD TWP — GRAND TRAVERSE, 

Respondent. 

/ 

MICHAEL B. SHAPIRO (P20282) 

LAURA M. HALLAHAN (P42101) 

DANIEL L. STANLEY (P57052) 

SETH A. O'LOUGHLIN (P80257) 

HONIGMAN LLP 

KELSEA M. MELCHER (P85821) 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

HALLAHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 

660 Woodward Avenue 

Attorneys for Respondent 

2290 First National Building 

1750 S. Telegraph Road, Suite 202 

Detroit, MI 48226-3506 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302 

(313) 465-7622 

(248) 731-3089 

ANSWER TO SEVERED PETITION 

AND 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

ANSWER 

Respondent, Garfield Township, by and through its attorneys, Hallahan & Associates, P.C., 

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

1. 

Respondent lacks the information and knowledge necessary to respond to the truth 

of the allegations set forth in Paragraph 

1 and, therefore, leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

2. 

Respondent admits the allegations in Paragraph 2 insofar as it is the entity that

Page 2

4. 

Respondent admits that subject property 

is classified as commercial business 

improved. 

With respect to the remaining allegations in Paragraph 4, Respondent lacks knowledge 

or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained therein and 

leaves Petitioner to its proofs. 

5. 

Respondent acknowledges the issues raised by Petitioner in Paragraph 5 but denies 

that Petitioner’s claims have merit. 

6. 

Respondent acknowledges Petitioner’s belief relative to the value of a loss but 

denies that such a loss has occurred. 

7. 

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

that no assertion was made. In further answer, Petitioner only sets forth a hypothetical condition 

(i.e., “if P.A. 174 of 2006 requires a board of review protest 

. 

. .) but then fails to state whether or 

not a protest was made. 

8. 

Respondent denies the allegations in Paragraph 8, including subparagraphs (a)-(d), 

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 of true cash value 

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

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

constitutional. 

9. 

Respondent acknowledges the relief requested by Petitioner in the final paragraph 

of the Petition but denies that Petitioner is entitled to the requested relief due to the statements in 

the above Paragraphs.

Page 3

WHEREFORE, 

Respondent, 

Garfield Township, 

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: 

July 30,2025 

(248) 731-3089 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

Respondent, Garfield Township, asserts the following affirmative defenses: 

I. 

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. Alki 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 Respondent or

Page 4

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.

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

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002387

Township Of Garfield,

Respondent.

ORDER OF DEFAULT

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

Respondent has failed to file an answer. As such, Respondent must file and serve an 

answer to the petition and file proof demonstrating service of the answer within 14 days 

of the entry of this order. See TTR 235 and 227. Tribunal rules and information on 

Entire Tribunal answers can be found on our website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib.

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Respondent 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: July 24, 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

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.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 25-002387

Page 2 of 10

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

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

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

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

act, MCL 205.735a.” TTR 225(5)

Page 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

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

 ENTIRE TRIBUNAL

v

 

MTT Docket No. 25-002387

Township Of Garfield,

Respondent.

ORDER OF DEFAULT

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

Respondent has failed to file an answer. As such, Respondent must file and serve an 

answer to the petition and file proof demonstrating service of the answer within 14 days 

of the entry of this order. See TTR 235 and 227. Tribunal rules and information on 

Entire Tribunal answers can be found on our website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib.

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Respondent 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.ii 

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

Page 4

MTT

Page 5

ST

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

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, 

Petitioner,

 MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

v

MTT Docket No.: 25-002387

Township Of Garfield, 

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: June 16, 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 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

MTT Docket No. 25-002387 

[Parcel No(s). 28-05-022-009-20] 

Garfield Twp. - Grand Traverse, 

Respondent. 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

Lisa Joseph states that she is employed by HONIGMAN LLP, attorneys for Petitioner, and 

that on 

b / (5 [2-K 

she did serve a copy of Petitioner's Petition, with docket number, upon 

the parties named on the attached list. 

/s/ La (racy, 

Lisa Joseph

Page 2

BY CERTIFIED UNITED STATES MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED: 

CLERK 

GARFIELD TWP. - GRAND TRAVERSE 

3848 VETERANS DRIVE 

TRAVERSE CITY, MI 49684 

ASSESSOR 

GARFIELD TWP. - GRAND TRAVERSE 

3848 VETERANS DRIVE 

TRAVERSE CITY, MI 49684 

AND BY FIRST-CLASS UNITED STATES MAIL: 

CLERK 

GRAND TRAVERSE COUNTY 

400 BOARDMAN AVENUE 

TRAVERSE CITY, MI 49684-2542 

DIRECTOR OF EQUALIZATION 

GRAND TRAVERSE COUNTY 

400 BOARDMAN AVENUE 

TRAVERSE CITY, MI 49684-2542 

SECRETARY OF SCHOOL BOARD 

TRAVERSE CITY AREA PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

412 WEBSTER STREET 

TRAVERSE CITY, MI 49686-2669 

STATE TREASURER 

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF 

TREASURY 

TREASURY BUILDING 

430 W. ALLEGAN ST. 

LANSING, MI 48922 

25-0087

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

25-0087 

60915435.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

MTT Docket No. 25-002387 

 

[Parcel No(s). 28-05-022-009-20] 

Garfield Twp. - Grand Traverse, 

Respondent. 

_________________________/ 

Michael B. Shapiro (P20282) 

Daniel L. Stanley (P57052) 

Honigman LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

39400 Woodward Avenue 

Suite 101 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304-5151 

(313) 465-7622 

mshapiro@honigman.com 

dstanley@honigman.com 

 

 

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 

lhallahan@hallahanlaw.colm 

soloughlin@hallahanlaw.com 

kmelcher@hallahanlaw.com 

 

 

 

SEVERED PETITION 

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust (“Petitioner”), through its attorneys, HONIGMAN 

LLP, says: 

1. 

Petitioner's principal office address is Property Tax Department, 2608 SE J Street, 

Suite 2, Bentonville, AR 72716-0555. Petitioner is a party in interest with respect to property taxes 

on tax parcel no(s). 28-05-022-009-20 ("Petitioner's Property"), also known as Supercenter

Page 2

2 

60915435.1 

(US02338) at 2640 Crossing Circle located in Grand Traverse County, Michigan. If this petition 

includes more than one (1) real property tax parcel, the tax parcels are contiguous. 

2. 

Respondent, Garfield Twp. - Grand Traverse, assesses and collects property taxes 

on Petitioner's Property. 

3. 

In 2025, Respondent determined the taxable value of Petitioner's Property to be 

$4,021,100 and assessed Petitioner's Property at $4,021,100, which will result in a state equalized 

value in the same amount based upon the tentative equalization factor. 

4. 

Petitioner's Property is classified as Comm/Bus Imp. Petitioner's Property is 

presently used or available for use for Retail purposes. Petitioner believes that Petitioner's Property 

was originally designed to be used for Retail purposes. 

5. 

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

value and (d) uniformity. 

6. 

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

relative to the value of a loss. 

7. 

If P.A. 174 of 2006 requires a board of review protest for Petitioner’s Property, a 

board of review protest was filed in March, 2025. 

8. 

The 2025 assessment, including state equalized value and taxable value, imposed 

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

and operate as a fraud upon the taxpayer for the reasons that: 

(a) 

The assessment, including state equalized value and/or taxable value, 

exceeds the amount permitted by the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes;

Page 3

3 

60915435.1 

(b) 

The assessment, including state equalized value and/or taxable value, are at 

higher percentages of true cash value than permissible under the Michigan Constitution and 

applicable statutes; 

(c) 

The assessment, including taxable value and/or state equalized value, are 

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

Property that is taxable under Michigan law, and are based upon the application of wrong 

principles; and, 

(d) 

The assessment, including state equalized value and/or taxable value, and 

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

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

WHEREFORE, Petitioner requests that the Tax Tribunal enter an Order reducing the 2025 

taxable value of Petitioner's Property from $4,021,100 to $2,743,000, and reducing the 2025 

assessed and state equalized value of Petitioner's Property from $4,021,100 to $2,743,000, and 

requiring Respondent to pay Petitioner the refunds attributable to such reductions, plus interest 

and costs.

Page 4

4 

60915435.1

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

25-0087 

60915435.1 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING & REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

MTT Docket No. 25-002387 

 

[Parcel No(s). 28-05-022-009-20] 

Garfield Twp. - Grand Traverse, 

Respondent. 

_________________________/ 

Michael B. Shapiro (P20282) 

Daniel L. Stanley (P57052) 

Honigman LLP 

Attorneys for Petitioner 

39400 Woodward Avenue 

Suite 101 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304-5151 

(313) 465-7622 

mshapiro@honigman.com 

dstanley@honigman.com 

 

 

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 

lhallahan@hallahanlaw.colm 

soloughlin@hallahanlaw.com 

kmelcher@hallahanlaw.com 

 

 

 

SEVERED PETITION 

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust (“Petitioner”), through its attorneys, HONIGMAN 

LLP, says: 

1. 

Petitioner's principal office address is Property Tax Department, 2608 SE J Street, 

Suite 2, Bentonville, AR 72716-0555. Petitioner is a party in interest with respect to property taxes 

on tax parcel no(s). 28-05-022-009-20 ("Petitioner's Property"), also known as Supercenter

Page 2

2 

60915435.1 

(US02338) at 2640 Crossing Circle located in Grand Traverse County, Michigan. If this petition 

includes more than one (1) real property tax parcel, the tax parcels are contiguous. 

2. 

Respondent, Garfield Twp. - Grand Traverse, assesses and collects property taxes 

on Petitioner's Property. 

3. 

In 2025, Respondent determined the taxable value of Petitioner's Property to be 

$4,021,100 and assessed Petitioner's Property at $4,021,100, which will result in a state equalized 

value in the same amount based upon the tentative equalization factor. 

4. 

Petitioner's Property is classified as Comm/Bus Imp. Petitioner's Property is 

presently used or available for use for Retail purposes. Petitioner believes that Petitioner's Property 

was originally designed to be used for Retail purposes. 

5. 

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

value and (d) uniformity. 

6. 

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

relative to the value of a loss. 

7. 

If P.A. 174 of 2006 requires a board of review protest for Petitioner’s Property, a 

board of review protest was filed in March, 2025. 

8. 

The 2025 assessment, including state equalized value and taxable value, imposed 

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

and operate as a fraud upon the taxpayer for the reasons that: 

(a) 

The assessment, including state equalized value and/or taxable value, 

exceeds the amount permitted by the Michigan Constitution and applicable statutes;

Page 3

3 

60915435.1 

(b) 

The assessment, including state equalized value and/or taxable value, are at 

higher percentages of true cash value than permissible under the Michigan Constitution and 

applicable statutes; 

(c) 

The assessment, including taxable value and/or state equalized value, are 

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

Property that is taxable under Michigan law, and are based upon the application of wrong 

principles; and, 

(d) 

The assessment, including state equalized value and/or taxable value, and 

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

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

WHEREFORE, Petitioner requests that the Tax Tribunal enter an Order reducing the 2025 

taxable value of Petitioner's Property from $4,021,100 to $2,743,000, and reducing the 2025 

assessed and state equalized value of Petitioner's Property from $4,021,100 to $2,743,000, and 

requiring Respondent to pay Petitioner the refunds attributable to such reductions, plus interest 

and costs.

Page 4

4 

60915435.1

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

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 

Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust, 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

 

Petitioner, 

 

 

v 

 

MTT Docket No. 24-001173 & 

 

 

25-002387 

 

Garfield Township, 

 

Presiding Judge 

Respondent. 

 

Patricia L. Halm 

 

ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO AMEND 

 

ORDER SEVERING 2025 TAX YEAR AND ASSIGNING IT 

DOCKET NUMBER 25-002387 

 

On May 14, 2025, Petitioner filed a motion requesting that the Tribunal permit it to 

amend the petition filed in this case to include the 2025 tax year. 

 

On June 4, 2025, Respondent filed a response to the motion. In the response, 

Respondent states that valuation disclosures and prehearing statements are due on 

August 19, 2025, leaving an insufficient amount of time for Respondent to “conduct 

discovery or prepare a valuation disclosure relevant to the 2025 tax year. . . .” 

Respondent therefore requests that if the motion is granted, the 2025 tax year be 

severed from this appeal and assigned its own docket number. 

 

The Tribunal has considered the motion, the response, and case file and finds that 

Petitioner timely filed its Motion to Amend, included the necessary information and filing 

fee, and otherwise met all requirements, as set forth in MCL 205.737 and MCL 

205.735a. Due to the stage in which this case is at, however, and in the interest of 

judicial efficiency, the 2025 tax year shall be severed from this case and assigned to a 

new docket number. Therefore, 

 

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s Motion to Amend is GRANTED. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner’s assessment appeal for the 2025 tax year is 

SEVERED and ASSIGNED to Docket No. 25-002387. 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioner shall file a petition pertaining to the 2025 tax 

year within 21 days of entry of this order.1 The petition shall note the docket number 

 

1 See TTR 233.

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 24-001173 & 25-002387 

Page 2 of 2 

 

assigned by the Tribunal for the 2025 tax year and if filed utilizing the Tribunal’s e-filing 

system, must be filed on the assigned 2025 docket number as a “Severed Petition.”2 

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Tribunal shall issue a Notice of Docket after receipt 

of the petition for the 2025 tax year. 

 

Failure to comply with this order may result in dismissal of the appeal for the 2025 tax 

year.3 

 

 

Entered: June 12, 2025 

 

 

 

By _____________________________ 

kac/jcr 

 

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 

 

 

2 Alternatively, the petition may be downloaded from the Tribunal’s website at www.michigan.gov/taxtrib 

and mailed to the Tribunal via United States Postal Service at: Michigan Tax Tribunal, PO BOX 30232, 

Lansing, MI 48909. The petition may also be delivered to the Tribunal via overnight carrier (UPS, FedEx, 

or DHL) at: Michigan Tax Tribunal, 2nd Floor MTT, 2407 N. Grand River Avenue, Lansing, MI 48933. 

3 See TTR 237.

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.