Betty D Mercer v. Muskegon Township
336382
Mich. Ct. App.Dec 26, 2017Background
- Petitioner Betty Mercer owns a homesteaded residential property in Muskegon Township and sought a poverty exemption under MCL 211.7u for 2016 taxes.
- The township board of review denied the poverty-exemption claim, stating petitioner did not meet income guidelines.
- Mercer (petitioner's son and authorized representative) filed an appeal with the Michigan Tax Tribunal (MTT). A notice of in-person hearing was issued and a proof of service stated notice was sent on August 23, 2016, to the email on file.
- Mercer asserts he never received the hearing notice; the MTT dismissed the petition on November 21, 2016 for failure to appear and denied reconsideration, relying on its records showing the notice was issued to Mercer’s email.
- The MTT did not rule on the substantive poverty-exemption claim; the Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal and remanded, finding the MTT failed to consider sanctions factors and raised due-process/notice concerns.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether MTT properly dismissed petition for failure to appear | Mercer: dismissal improper; she and her rep never received hearing notice and should be allowed to present evidence | Township: (no brief filed) MTT relied on its records showing notice issued to rep's email | Reversed: dismissal was an abuse of discretion because MTT did not evaluate appropriate sanction factors and did not assure adequate notice/reasonable procedures |
| Whether MTT afforded due process (adequate notice/opportunity to be heard) | Mercer: e-mailed notice may not have been received; MTT should have confirmed service or used alternative contact methods; petitioner deserved a hearing or file-based decision | Township: implicitly that issuance to email satisfied service rules and notice requirement | Court: Due-process concerns raised; MTT records did not show email was opened/received and proof of service was insufficiently specific; remand for hearing |
| Whether MTT should have accepted and considered petitioner's financial evidence without in-person hearing | Mercer: offered financial documents demonstrating indigence; MTT could have decided on the file | Township: (no argument in record) | Court: Could not decide exemption on appeal because MTT made no initial substantive ruling; remanded for de novo consideration by MTT |
| Whether MTT complied with Tribunal rules when serving notice | Mercer: service form did not state method; rules require service to last known mailing or email address | Township: MTT records show notice was issued to rep's email | Court: MTT did not make record showing actual receipt or opened email; proof of service language was inadequate; remand required |
Key Cases Cited
- Mich Props, LLC v. Meridian Twp, 491 Mich. 518; 817 N.W.2d 548 (court review limits and Tax Tribunal factual findings)
- Grimm v. Dep’t of Treasury, 291 Mich. App. 140; 810 N.W.2d 65 (review of Tax Tribunal dismissal for failure to comply is abuse-of-discretion standard)
- Spranger v. City of Warren, 308 Mich. App. 477; 865 N.W.2d 52 (MTT must consider poverty exemption de novo and provide meaningful notice)
- Vicencio v. Jaime Ramirez, MD, PC, 211 Mich. App. 501; 536 N.W.2d 280 (factors to consider before imposing dismissal sanction)