Matter of Malik v. Tax Commn. of the City of New York

NY Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department

more+
less-

DECISION & ORDER

In five related proceedings pursuant to Real Property Tax Law article 7 to review real property tax assessments for tax years 1997/1998 through 2001/2002, the Tax Commission of the City of New York and the Commissioner of Finance of the City of New York appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golia, J.), entered October 31, 2008, which denied their motion to dismiss the petitions pursuant to RPTL 714 and, in effect, pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(3) on the ground that the petitioner is not an aggrieved person within the meaning of RPTL 704.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The petitioner, a nonfractional lessee of certain property in Queens, is an aggrieved person within the meaning of RPTL 704(1). Since the lease at bar clearly required the petitioner pay all of the real estate taxes levied against the subject property, any tax assessment of the property directly affects the petitioner's pecuniary interest, and the total assessments were subject to challenge (see Matter of Waldbaum, Inc. v Finance Adm'r of City of N. Y., 74 NY2d 128, 134; Matter of Big V Supermarkets, store #217 v Assessor of Town of E. Greenbush, 114 AD2d 726; see also Matter of Mack v Assessor of Town of Ramapo, 72 AD2d 604, 605; cf. Matter of EFCO Prods. v Cullen, 161 AD2d 44, 46; Matter of Ames Dept. Stores v Assessor of Town of Concord, 102 AD2d 9, 11). Therefore, the Supreme Court properly denied the appellants' motion to dismiss the petitions pursuant to RPTL 714 and, in effect, pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(3) on the ground that petitioner is not an aggrieved person within the meaning of RPTL 704.

The appellants' remaining contentions are without merit.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Reference Info:Decision | State, 2nd Circuit, New York | United States


DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Benjamin Williams, Podell, Schwartz, Schechter & Banfield, LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

more+
less-

Podell, Schwartz, Schechter & Banfield, LLP on:

JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×
Loading...
×
×