RALPH G SACHS V MAYOR OF DETROIT
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
RALPH G. SACHS,
UNPUBLISHED
August 6, 2002
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v
MAYOR OF DETROIT, TREASURER OF
DETROIT, ASSESSOR OF DETROIT, CITY OF
DETROIT, WAYNE COUNTY EXECUTIVE and
WAYNE COUNTY TREASURER,
No. 231859
Wayne Circuit Court
LC No. 00-026695-CP
Defendants-Appellees.
Before: Murray, P.J., and Sawyer and Zahra, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff appeals as of right from a circuit court order granting defendants’ motion for
summary disposition and dismissing his complaint for lack of jurisdiction. We affirm. This
appeal is being decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
The trial court’s ruling on a motion for summary disposition is reviewed de novo. Kefgen
v Davidson, 241 Mich App 611, 616; 617 NW2d 351 (2000). In reviewing a motion brought
under MCR 2.116(C)(4), this Court must determine whether the pleadings demonstrate that the
defendant was entitled to judgment as a matter of law or whether the affidavits and other
evidence show there was no genuine issue of material fact. Jones v Slick, 242 Mich App 715,
718; 619 NW2d 733 (2000).
Subject-matter jurisdiction is an absolute requirement in every case, In re AMB, 248
Mich App 144, 166; ___ NW2d ___ (2001), and the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to
establish jurisdiction. Citizens For Common Sense in Government v Attorney General, 243 Mich
App 43, 50; 620 NW2d 546 (2000). Subject-matter jurisdiction refers to the power of a court to
act and the authority a court has to hear and determine a case. Wayne Co Chief Executive v
Governor, 230 Mich App 258, 269; 583 NW2d 512 (1998). Whether a court has subject-matter
jurisdiction is a question of law that is reviewed de novo on appeal. Etefia v Credit
Technologies, Inc, 245 Mich App 466, 472; 628 NW2d 577 (2001).
Circuit courts are courts of general jurisdiction, and have original jurisdiction over all
civil claims and remedies except where exclusive jurisdiction is vested in some other court or the
circuit court is denied jurisdiction by the constitution or statute. Farmers Ins Exchange v South
-1-
Lyon Community Sch, 237 Mich App 235, 241; 602 NW2d 588 (1999). The Michigan Tax
Tribunal (MTT) has exclusive and original jurisdiction over proceedings for (1) a direct review
of a final decision, finding, ruling, determination, or order of an agency relating to assessment,
valuation, rates, special assessments, allocation, or equalization under property tax laws, and (2)
a refund or redetermination of a tax under property tax laws. MCL 205.731. The MTT has
broad powers to remedy irregularities in assessment and valuation. Richland Twp v State Tax
Comm, 210 Mich App 328, 336; 533 NW2d 369 (1995). It can order the payment or refund of
taxes and grant other relief or issue writs, orders, or directives it deems necessary. MCL
205.732(b), (c).
The gravamen of plaintiff’s complaint is that defendants improperly assessed him for
back property taxes, the payment of which should be refunded. Such matters are within the
exclusive jurisdiction of the MTT. MCL 205.731. The fact that plaintiff has included a claim
for injunctive relief does not confer jurisdiction on the circuit court. Wikman v Novi, 413 Mich
617, 647-649; 322 NW2d 103 (1982). Likewise, the fact that plaintiff styled his complaint as a
class action does not divest the MTT of jurisdiction. Id. at 649; Sessa v State Tax Comm, 134
Mich App 767, 771; 351 NW2d 863 (1984).
Affirmed.
/s/ Christopher M. Murray
/s/ David H. Sawyer
/s/ Brian J. Zahra
-2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
