1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.W.2d
  4. 780 N.W.2d
  5. 780 N.W.2d 753 (2010)
 

BRIGGS TAX SERVICE v. DETROIT PUB. SCHOOLS

Docket Nos. 138168, 138179, 138182.

780 N.W.2d 753 (2010)

BRIGGS TAX SERVICE, L.L.C., Petitioner-Appellee, v. DETROIT PUBLIC SCHOOLS and Detroit Board of Education, Respondents-Appellants, and City of Detroit and Wayne County Treasurer, Respondents. Briggs Tax Service, L.L.C., Petitioner-Appellee, v. Detroit Public Schools, Detroit Board of Education, and Wayne County Treasurer, Respondents, and City of Detroit, Respondent-Appellant. Briggs Tax Service, L.L.C., Petitioner-Appellee, v. Detroit Public Schools, Detroit Board of Education, and City of Detroit, Respondents, and Wayne County Treasurer, Respondent-Appellant.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

Decided March 30, 2010.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

The Mazzara Law Firm, PLLC (by Jack J. Mazzara), Grosse Pointe Woods, and Giamarco, Mullins & Horton, PC (by Larry W. Bennett), Troy, for Briggs Tax Service, L.L.C.

Dickinson Wright PLLC (by Robert F. Rhoades and Adam D. Grant), Thrun Law Firm, P.C. (by David Olmstead and Roy H. Henley), and Miller, Canfield, Paddock & Stone PLC (by Jerome R. Watson and Larry J. Saylor), Detroit, for the Detroit Public Schools and the Detroit Board of Education.

Joanne D. Stafford, Detroit, for the city of Detroit.

William M. Wolfson, Interim Corporation Counsel, and Richard G. Stanley, Assistant Corporation Counsel, for the Wayne County Treasurer.

Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP (by John D. Pirich, Lansing, Michael B. Shapiro, and Jason Conti, Detroit), for Amicus Curiae the Building Office Managers Association of Metropolitan Detroit.

Opinion

MARILYN J. KELLY, C.J.

The dispute in this case concerns whether respondent's wrongful collection of property taxes from petitioner constitutes a mutual mistake of fact within the meaning of MCL 211.53a. If the assessing officer and petitioner made a mutual mistake of fact, the three-year limitations period of MCL 211.53a applies, and petitioner may pursue its refund claim. If not, petitioner is not entitled to a refund because it did not file its...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases