400 Town Line Ltd. v. Assessor of Town of Islip

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

400 Town Line Ltd. v. Assessor of Town of Islip

278 A.D.2d 318, 718 N.Y.S.2d 206, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12952

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 11, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 278 A.D.2d 318 (400 Town Line Ltd. v. Assessor of Town of Islip) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

400 Town Line Ltd. v. Assessor of Town of Islip, 278 A.D.2d 318, 718 N.Y.S.2d 206, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12952 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

In a tax assessment review proceeding pursuant to Real Property Tax Law article 7, the appeals are from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cannavo, J.), dated October 5, 1999, which granted the petitioners’ motion to extend the time to file a note of issue, and (2) an order of the same court, dated October 29, 1999, which granted the petitioners’ motion to sever individual cases from the master petition of properties.

Ordered that the orders are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

[319]*319Contrary to appellants’ argument, the petitioners properly obtained a stay of the four-year deadline in which to file a note of issue (see, Real Property Tax Law § 718; Matter of Sullivan LaFarge v Town of Mamakating, 257 AD2d 752). In addition, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion when it granted the petitioners’ motion to sever individual cases from the master petition of properties (see, CPLR 603; Lauman & Co. v State of New York, 2 Misc 2d 693). O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Santucci and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In a tax assessment review proceeding pursuant to Real Property Tax Law article 7, the appeals are from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cannavo, J.), dated October 5, 1999, which granted the petitioners’ motion to extend the time to file a note of issue, and (2) an order of the same court, dated October 29, 1999, which granted the petitioners’ motion to sever individual cases from the master petition of properties.

Ordered that the orders are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

[319]*319Contrary to appellants’ argument, the petitioners properly obtained a stay of the four-year deadline in which to file a note of issue (see, Real Property Tax Law § 718; Matter of Sullivan LaFarge v Town of Mamakating, 257 AD2d 752). In addition, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion when it granted the petitioners’ motion to sever individual cases from the master petition of properties (see, CPLR 603; Lauman & Co. v State of New York, 2 Misc 2d 693). O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Santucci and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

278 A.D.2d 318, 718 N.Y.S.2d 206, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12952, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/400-town-line-ltd-v-assessor-of-town-of-islip-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack