Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 205.753 (2026)

Tax tribunal; appeal from final order or decision; record.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

TAX TRIBUNAL ACT

Act 186 of 1973

205.753 Tax tribunal; appeal from final order or decision; record.

Sec. 53.

(1) Subject to section 28 of article VI of the state constitution of 1963, and pursuant to section 102 of the administrative procedures act of 1969, Act No. 306 of the Public Acts of 1969, as amended, being section 24.302 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, and in accordance with the Michigan court rules, an appeal from the tribunal's decision shall be by right to the court of appeals. For purposes of the constitutional provision, the tribunal is the final agency for the administration of property tax laws.

(2) Appeal from the final order or decision of the tribunal may be taken by filing an appeal in accordance with the Michigan court rules after the entry of the order or decision appealed from or after denial of a motion for rehearing timely filed.

(3) An order, ruling, or decision before the final decision of the tribunal is not reviewable unless leave to appeal is granted by the court of appeals.

(4) A decision of the tribunal as to the assessment of real property is binding for the first year of assessment that is determined in the proceeding before the tribunal.

(5) On taking of appeal from the order or decision of the tribunal, the chief clerk of the tribunal shall prepare an official record of the proceeding that shall include the following:

(a) A list showing dates and docket entries of all documents and proceedings as shown by the file of the proceeding.

(b) All notices, pleadings, motions, and intermediate rulings.

(d) The decision, opinion, or order of the tribunal from which appeal is taken.

History: 1973, Act 186, Eff. July 1, 1974 ;-- Am. 1989, Act 284, Imd. Eff. Dec. 26, 1989

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 47 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1975–2025 · leading case: Wikman v. City of Novi, 322 N.W.2d 103 (Mich. 1982).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Wikman v. City of Novi, 322 N.W.2d 103 (Mich. 1982). · cites it 8× “F Although we have no arguments or briefs from the parties on this issue, Justice LEVIN'S opinion concludes that the term "property tax laws" must refer only to ad valorem property taxes because Const 1963, art 6, § 28, [17] and another section of the *639 Tax Tribunal Act, MCL…”

Wayne Cnty. v. Michigan State Tax Comm'n, 682 N.W.2d 100 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 3× “Obviously, if the Legislature intended that the STC be the final agency under art 6, § 28, for purposes of the Assessor’s Manual, the language in MCL 205.753 would not have been drafted in a manner that is all-encompassing.”

Signature Villas, LLC v. City of Ann Arbor, 714 N.W.2d 392 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “Following cross-motions for summary disposition, the MTT hearing officer issued an opinion and proposed *698 order concluding that “there was a ‘transfer of ownership’ of the subject real property under MCL 211.”

President Inn Props., LLC v. City of Grand Rapids, 806 N.W.2d 342 (Mich. Ct. App. 2011). “] Petitioner appeals by right, MCL 205.753(1), asserting that the Tax Tribunal committed several errors of law and also made several erroneous factual findings.”

Detroit Lions, Inc. v. City of Dearborn, 840 N.W.2d 168 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013). “MCL 205.753(1) and (2). Because the tribunal properly consolidated MTT Docket Nos.”

CAF Inv. Co. v. Saginaw Twp., 262 N.W.2d 863 (Mich. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 3× “” MCLA 205.753; MSA 7.650(53). The plain language of the statute specifically grants an appeal of right to the Court of Appeals from final decisions of the Tax Tribunal.”

Nicholson v. Birmingham Bd. of Review, 477 N.W.2d 492 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “MCL 205.753; MSA 7.650(53). An appeal from a final order or decision of the Tax Tribunal must be taken within twenty days after the entry of the order or within twenty days after a timely motion for rehearing is denied.”

Kistner v. Milliken, 432 F. Supp. 1001 (E.D. Mich. 1977). · cites it 2× “§ 205.753, subject to the constitutional restriction that such appeals from “any decision relating to valuation or allocation” may lie only in cases alleging “fraud, error of law or the adoption of wrong principles.”

Livingstone v. Dep't of Treasury, 456 N.W.2d 684 (Mich. 1990). · cites it 2× “See MCL 205.753(2); MSA 7.650(53)(2). Accordingly, the appellant, Mr.”

Michigan Nat'l Bank v. City of Lansing, 293 N.W.2d 626 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). “See CAF Investment Co v Saginaw Twp, 79 Mich App 559 ; 262 NW2d 863 (1977), MCL 205.753; MSA 7.650(53). This Court’s authority to review a decision of the Tax Tribunal is very limited.”

Consol. Aluminum Corp. v. Richmond Twp., 276 N.W.2d 566 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979). “In declaring that the Tax Tribunal is the final agency for the administration of the property tax law as specified in Const 1963, art 6, § 28, MCL 205.753(1); MSA 7.650(53X1), the Legislature removed the Tribunal from court review of its decisions except under the limited…”

Northwood Apts. v. City of Royal Oak, 296 N.W.2d 639 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). “1 See CAF Investment Co v Saginaw Twp, 79 Mich App 559 ; 262 NW2d 863 (1977), MCL 205.753; MSA 7.650(53).”

Show all 47 citing cases →

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 205.753(1) — 22 cases

Wikman v. City of Novi, 322 N.W.2d 103 (Mich. 1982). “F Although we have no arguments or briefs from the parties on this issue, Justice LEVIN'S opinion concludes that the term "property tax laws" must refer only to ad valorem property taxes because Const 1963, art 6, § 28, [17] and another section of the *639 Tax Tribunal Act, MCL…”

Wayne Cnty. v. Michigan State Tax Comm'n, 682 N.W.2d 100 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). “Obviously, if the Legislature intended that the STC be the final agency under art 6, § 28, for purposes of the Assessor’s Manual, the language in MCL 205.753 would not have been drafted in a manner that is all-encompassing.”

Detroit Lions, Inc. v. City of Dearborn, 840 N.W.2d 168 (Mich. Ct. App. 2013). “MCL 205.753(1) and (2). Because the tribunal properly consolidated MTT Docket Nos.”

Signature Villas, LLC v. City of Ann Arbor, 714 N.W.2d 392 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006). “Following cross-motions for summary disposition, the MTT hearing officer issued an opinion and proposed *698 order concluding that “there was a ‘transfer of ownership’ of the subject real property under MCL 211.”

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 205.753(2) — 7 cases

Livingstone v. Dep't of Treasury, 456 N.W.2d 684 (Mich. 1990). “See MCL 205.753(2); MSA 7.650(53)(2). Accordingly, the appellant, Mr.”

Nicholson v. Birmingham Bd. of Review, 477 N.W.2d 492 (Mich. Ct. App. 1991). “MCL 205.753; MSA 7.650(53). An appeal from a final order or decision of the Tax Tribunal must be taken within twenty days after the entry of the order or within twenty days after a timely motion for rehearing is denied.”

Sisbarro v. City of Fenton, 282 N.W.2d 443 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979).

Franklin Ridge Homes LLC v. City of Westland (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).

New Covert Generating Co. LLC v. Twp. of Covert (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 205.753(3) — 3 cases

20250225_C365726_49_365726.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).

Knier Powers Martin & Smith LLC v. City of Bay City (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).

Franklin Ridge Homes LLC v. City of Westland (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 205.753(4) — 1 case

Baraga Cnty. v. State Tax Comm'n, 622 N.W.2d 109 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001).

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 205.753(5) — 1 case

Adam Ponte Trust v. Pittsfield Twp. Assessor (Former) (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 205.753(5)(c) — 1 case

Adam Ponte Trust v. Pittsfield Twp. Assessor (Former) (Mich. Ct. App. 2015).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.