Michigan

William L Lawson Jr Trust Petitioner V Township Of Hamilton Respondent

Petitioner: William L Lawson Jr Trust
Respondent: Township Of Hamilton

Case overview

Docket number: 26-000620-TT
Status: Disposed
CaseType: SC Property
Division: Small Claims Division
County: Van Buren
Judge: No judge assigned

Docket history

Line #	Subject	Filer	Line Ref	Enter Date/Post Mark	Fee	Related Item
9	Order of Dismissal	Not recorded	Not recorded	09/03/2026	Not recorded	Download
8	Answer was received	RESP	Not recorded	08/06/2026	Not recorded	Download
7	Order Extending P's Default	Not recorded	5	08/04/2026	Not recorded	Download
6	Order of Partial Dismissal	Not recorded	Not recorded	07/06/2026	Not recorded	Download
5	Order of Default of Petitioner	Not recorded	Not recorded	07/06/2026	Not recorded	Download
4	Petition has been verified	Not recorded	1	07/06/2026	Not recorded	Download
3	Notice of Docket Number SC	Not recorded	Not recorded	07/02/2026	Not recorded	Download
2	Attachments to the Petition were filed	Not recorded	Not recorded	04/15/2026	Not recorded	Download
1	A petition was received.	Not recorded	Not recorded	04/15/2026	Not recorded	Download

Documents

26-000620 Order of Dismissal.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

William L Lawson Jr Trust,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

Petitioner,

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

MTT Docket No. 26-000620

Hamilton Township,

Presiding Judge

Respondent.

Patricia L. Halm

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The Tribunal has considered the file in this case and finds that Petitioner was placed in

default on July 6, 2026, because Petitioner appealed multiple parcels but did not file

copies of the notices giving rise to the appeal for all parcels involved. On August 4,

2026, the Tribunal extended the time for Petitioner to cure the default by an additional

14 days, and they have failed to respond. Petitioner has 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, Petitioner’s 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 Petitioner’s 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. 26-000620

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: September 3, 2026

By: /s/ Patricia L. Halm

smm

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.

26-000620.pdfRead complete document text →

Read document text excerpt

Page 1

RECEIVED 

AUG 1 0 2006 

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

MARLON 1. BROWN, DPA 

s 

GOVERNOR 

LANSING 

DIRECTOR 

PROPERTY TAX APPEAL ANSWER FORM 

VALUATION / UNCAPPING 

MTT DOCKET NO, 

_26-000620 

Section 1: Respondent’s Contact Information 

Unit of Government 

HAMILTON AND LAWRENCE TOWNSHIP 

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

PO BOX 35 

City or Town: 

State: 

ZIP Code: 

DECATUR 

mi 

49045 

Telephone Number: 269-655-1144 

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

BEN.APGLLC@GMAIL.COM 

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

First Name: 

ML: 

Last Name: 

BEN 

A 

BROUSSEAU 

Firm Name (if any): 

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

PO BOX 35 

City or Town: 

State: 

ZIP Code: 

DECATUR 

Mi 

49045 

Tetephone Number: 269-655-1144 

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

BEN.APGLLC@GMAIL.COM 

Section 3: Subject Property Information 

Are the parcels fisted by Petitioner contiguous or adjoining? 

if no, list all parcels that are adjoining in separate groupings. Attacha 

separate sheet if necessary. 

Yes 

Im No 

[} Not Applicable 

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

ves 

[J No

Page 2

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

THE PETITIONER IS APPEALING THE ASSESSMENT AND TAXABLE VALUE

INCREASES ON TWO PARCELS. ONE OF THE PARCELS IS LOCATED IN

HAMILTON TOWNSHIP AND THE PETITIONER DID ATTEND THE 2026 MARCH

BOARD OF REVIEW. THE PETITIONER DID NOT ATTEND THE 2026 MARCH

BoD, QF REVIEW FOR THE OTHER PARCEL LOCATED IN LAWRENCE

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)?

Yes

If yes, chack which BOR Petitioner attended:

March

0 July

[1] December ON

1 OF 2 PARCELS.

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

OJ 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? [Wm] Yes

If yes, explain

Is Petitioner appealing from a State Tax Commission Order?

[J ves

#No

If so, what is the issus date?

IF PETITIONER IS APPEALING THE UNCAPPING OF TAXABLE VALUE

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

Under what statutory section was the Taxable Value uncapped?

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

Parcet Number:

SEE MULTIPLE PARCEL ATTACHMENT

Classification of Properly:

Real]

Personal

{J (chsck one)

Agricultural (1

Commercial 1

Industrial [1

Residential 3

Timber-Cutover [1

Developmentai{]

Utility 0 (check one)

Page 3

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

GRETCHEN WHITMER 

GOVERNOR 

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS 

LANSING 

MARLON 1. BROWN, DPA 

DIRECTOR 

MULTIPLE PARCEL ATTACHMENT TO ANSWER FORM 

VALUATION APPEAL 

MTT DOCKET NO. 

_26-000620 

Respondent’s Contact Information: 

Local Unit of GovernmentiFirst Name: 

mi 

Last Name: 

BEN 

A 

BROUSSEAU 

Valuation Information 

Parcel Number: 80 

1 0 00 1 

002 

1 1 

Classification of Property: 

Real 

Personal L] (check one) 

Agricultur§] 

Commeralat{] 

Industrial) 

Residential #2 

 Timber-Cutover [J 

 Davalopmentat 0 

Utility {J (check one) 

Assessed Vaile (also known aa State Equalized Value) established 

| Taxable Value established by the Board of Review: 

by the Board of Review: 

“7277, [Cire] 

206,196 

What do you believe is the fair market valu (also known as true cash value)? 

1,455,800 

What do you believe is the assessed value? (multiply true cash 

What do you believe is the taxable value? (cannot exceed 

value by 8) 

727,900 

assessed valus) 

206,196 

Valuation Information 

Parcel Number: 

80-1 3-036-002-00 

Classification of Property: 

Reali 

Personal 

(1 (check one) 

Agriculturfl 

Commerciat [1 

IndustriatT] 

Residential 

J 

Timber-Cutover (J 

Davelopmentat [J 

Uulity [J (check one) 

Assessed Vwiue’(also known as State Equalized Vatue) established 

| Taxable Value established by the Board of Review: 

3) 

! 

y the Board of Review: 

/ 2,77 

|=04%) 

44,895 

245,800 

What do you beligve is the fair market value (also known as true cash value)? 

What do you believe is the assessed value? (multiply true cash 

value by 5) 122,900 

What do you belleve is the taxable value? {cannot exceed 

assessed value) 

44,899 

Valuation Information 

Parcel Number; 

Classification of Property: 

Real L] 

Personal [J {check one) 

Agricuitural C1 

Commercial 

[J 

industrial 3 

Residential 

[J 

Timber-Cutover (1 

Davelopmental [1 

Utility {J (chack one) 

Assessed Value (also known as State Equalized Value) established 

by the Board of Review: 

Taxable Value established by the Board of Review:

Page 4

202 PEeser 

CRED 

Parcel Number: 

80~10-001-002-11 

Jurisdiction: 

HAMILTON TOWNSHIP 

County: 

Van Buren 

Printed on 

08/04/2026 

Grantor 

Grantee 

Sale 

Sale 

Inst. 

Terms of Sale 

Liber 

Verified 

Prent. 

Price 

Date 

Type 

& 

Page 

By 

Trans. 

LAWSON WILLIAM 

L 

JR 

LAWSON WILLIAM 

IL 

JR TRUST 

0 

11/21/2016 

QC 

03-ARM'S LENGTH 

1644-813 

OTHER 

0.0 

Property Address 

Class: 

AGRICULTURAL-IMPRO Zoning: 

AG 

Building Perxmit(s) 

Date 

Number 

Status 

47367 

72ND AVE 

School: 

DECATUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

05/21/2006 

06-009 

FINISHED 

P.R.E. 

100% 03/28/2003 

Owner's Name/Address 

MEP 

#: 

2-A1 

LAWSON WILLIAM 

L 

JR TRUST 

2026 Est TCV 1,466,633 TCV/TFA: 991.64 

47367 72ND AVE 

et 

/ 

. 

DECATUR MI 

45045 

X 

Improved 

Vacant 

Land Value Estimates 

for Land Table 10101.AGRICULTURAL 

Public 

* 

Factors 

* 

Improvements 

Description 

Frontage 

Depth 

Front 

Depth 

Rate 

%Adj. 

Reason 

Value 

— 

Dirt

Page 5

Res

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.

26-000620 Extend Default (no response).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

William L Lawson Jr Trust,

MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

Petitioner,

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

MTT Docket No. 26-000620

Hamilton Township,

Presiding Judge

Respondent.

Patricia L. Halm

ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR PETITIONER TO CURE DEFAULT

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

holding Petitioner in default on July 6, 2026, because Petitioner is appealing the tax

assessment for Parcel No. 80-10-001-002-11 and Parcel No. 80-13-036-002-00, but

failed to file a copy of the notice giving rise to the appeal, i.e., Board of Review (BOR)

decision for Parcel No. 80-13-036-002-00.1 Petitioner was required to cure the default

by obtaining a copy of the BOR decision for Parcel No. 80-13-036-002-00 from

Respondent and filing a copy with the Tribunal within 14 days. Petitioner has had

ample time to comply, yet has failed to respond or submit the required filings. Though

the Tribunal finds an extension of time to cure the default appropriate, Petitioner’s

failure to comply with Tribunal orders and its Rules of Practice and Procedure has

established a history of deliberate delay that would justify dismissal of the case for

failure to timely comply with this order.2 Therefore,

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

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

default: (1) file a copy of the BOR decision for Parcel No. 80-13-036-002-00, (2) file a

Motion to Set Aside Default, and (3) 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.3

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 “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).

Page 2

MTT Docket No. 26-000620 

Page 2 of 2 

 

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

TTR 237.4 

 

Entered: August 4, 2026 

 

 

 

By: /s/ Patricia L. Halm 

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 See also MCL 205.732.

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.

Partial_Dismissal_-_Valuation.2026-07-06_06-35-26.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

William L Lawson Jr Trust,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

MTT Docket No. 26-000620

Township Of Hamilton,

Respondent.

ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL

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

is appealing assessments for prior tax years and the Tribunal has no authority over

those assessments under MCL 205.735a, as the petition was not timely filed.1 Further,

the Tribunal also has no authority over those assessments, as the facts alleged do not

establish that the assessments were the result of a clerical error (i.e., “an error of a

transpositional, typographical, or mathematical nature”) or a mutual mistake of fact (i.e.,

“an erroneous belief, which is shared and relied on by both parties”).2 Rather, the facts

alleged indicate a valuation dispute that does not involve the correction of a clerical

error or mutual mistake of fact. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s assessment appeal is PARTIALLY DISMISSED. The

appeal shall continue for the 2026 tax year(s) only.

By: /s/ Patricia L. Halm

Entered: July 6, 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

1 See Electronic Data Systems Corporation v Township of Flint, 253 Mich App 538 (2002).

2 See International Place Apartments – IV v Ypsilanti Township, 216 Mich App 104, 109 (1996), Ford

Motor Company v City of Woodhaven, 475 Mich 425, 442 (2006).

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

William L Lawson Jr Trust,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

MTT Docket No. 26-000620

Township Of Hamilton,

Respondent.

ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL

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

is appealing assessments for prior tax years and the Tribunal has no authority over

those assessments under MCL 205.735a, as the petition was not timely filed.3 Further,

the Tribunal also has no authority over those assessments, as the facts alleged do not

establish that the assessments were the result of a clerical error (i.e., “an error of a

transpositional, typographical, or mathematical nature”) or a mutual mistake of fact (i.e.,

“an erroneous belief, which is shared and relied on by both parties”).4 Rather, the facts

alleged indicate a valuation dispute that does not involve the correction of a clerical

error or mutual mistake of fact. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s assessment appeal is PARTIALLY DISMISSED. The

appeal shall continue for the 2026 tax year(s) only.

By: /s/ Patricia L. Halm

Entered: July 6, 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

3 See Electronic Data Systems Corporation v Township of Flint, 253 Mich App 538 (2002).

4 See International Place Apartments – IV v Ypsilanti Township, 216 Mich App 104, 109 (1996), Ford

Motor Company v City of Woodhaven, 475 Mich 425, 442 (2006).

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

William L Lawson Jr Trust,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

MTT Docket No. 26-000620

Township Of Hamilton,

Respondent.

ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL

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

is appealing assessments for prior tax years and the Tribunal has no authority over

those assessments under MCL 205.735a, as the petition was not timely filed.5 Further,

the Tribunal also has no authority over those assessments, as the facts alleged do not

establish that the assessments were the result of a clerical error (i.e., “an error of a

transpositional, typographical, or mathematical nature”) or a mutual mistake of fact (i.e.,

“an erroneous belief, which is shared and relied on by both parties”).6 Rather, the facts

alleged indicate a valuation dispute that does not involve the correction of a clerical

error or mutual mistake of fact. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner’s assessment appeal is PARTIALLY DISMISSED. The

appeal shall continue for the 2026 tax year(s) only.

By: /s/ Patricia L. Halm

Entered: July 6, 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

5 See Electronic Data Systems Corporation v Township of Flint, 253 Mich App 538 (2002).

6 See International Place Apartments – IV v Ypsilanti Township, 216 Mich App 104, 109 (1996), Ford

Motor Company v City of Woodhaven, 475 Mich 425, 442 (2006).

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_Order_of_Default_of_Petition.2026-07-06_06-34-43.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

William L Lawson Jr Trust,

Petitioner, MICHIGAN TAX TRIBUNAL

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION

MTT Docket No. 26-000620

Township Of Hamilton,

Respondent.

ORDER OF DEFAULT

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

Petitioner is appealing multiple parcels and did not submit a copy of all notices giving

rise to the appeal (i.e., notice of action taken by Board of Review, uncapping notice,

PRE denial notice, final assessment notice, etc.), as required by TTR 279. As such,

Petitioner must submit the missing notices within 14 days of the entry of this order.

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that Petitioner is HELD IN DEFAULT.

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

above, within 14 days of the entry of this order.1

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: /s/ Patricia L. Halm

Entered: July 6, 2026

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