The clerical, nursing and other nonphysician staff at the medical office was employed by and compensated by Butterworth Hospital. Their patients were free to continue with them or to stay with Petitioner or Butterworth Hospital. Petitioner, as a nonprofit corporation, is a nonprofit trust within the meaning of this exemption as interpreted by Michigan appellate courts. The stipulated facts establish that the medical office at issue was not used for hospital or public health purposes but was used by Doctors Steen and Davis, as PCS employees, to conduct a typical family medicine practice, examining, consulting with and treating patients. As such, the office was used for the private practice of family medicine and not for hospital or public health purposes within the meaning of MCL 211.7r.
Petitioner claims that the medical office was used for public health purposes.
224 Mich App at 33. Doctors Steen and Davis, as PCS employees, moved their private medical practice into the Pavilion and welcomed new patients until terminating their employment with PCS on August 31, 1997. For the reasons stated, we conclude that the subject medical office was not used for hospital or public health purposes within the meaning and intent of MCL 211.7r and is not exempt from ad valorem property taxation for the tax year 1996.