Brooklyn Union Gas Co. v. State Board of Equalization & Assessment

New York Court of Appeals

Brooklyn Union Gas Co. v. State Board of Equalization & Assessment

444 N.E.2d 1328, 58 N.Y.2d 713, 458 N.Y.S.2d 909, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3923

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 2, 1982

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 444 N.E.2d 1328 (Brooklyn Union Gas Co. v. State Board of Equalization & Assessment) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brooklyn Union Gas Co. v. State Board of Equalization & Assessment, 444 N.E.2d 1328, 58 N.Y.2d 713, 458 N.Y.S.2d 909, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3923 (N.Y. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question answered in the negative, for the reasons set forth in the memorandum in Matter of Consolidated Edison Co. of N. Y. v State Bd. of Equalization & Assessment (58 NY2d 710 [decided herewith]). In view of the additional arguments advanced by petitioner in this proceeding, we add that the Third Department’s rule (22 NYCRR 839.2) is not inconsistent with CPLR 3140, which authorizes its adoption and involves neither an improper delegation of legislative power, nor, petitioner having been afforded the opportunity to file appraisal reports on any ground or grounds it saw fit, any denial of due process of law.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur; Judge Gabrielli taking no part.

Order affirmed, with costs, and question certified answered in the negative in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question answered in the negative, for the reasons set forth in the memorandum in Matter of Consolidated Edison Co. of N. Y. v State Bd. of Equalization & Assessment (58 NY2d 710 [decided herewith]). In view of the additional arguments advanced by petitioner in this proceeding, we add that the Third Department’s rule (22 NYCRR 839.2) is not inconsistent with CPLR 3140, which authorizes its adoption and involves neither an improper delegation of legislative power, nor, petitioner having been afforded the opportunity to file appraisal reports on any ground or grounds it saw fit, any denial of due process of law.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur; Judge Gabrielli taking no part.

Order affirmed, with costs, and question certified answered in the negative in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

444 N.E.2d 1328, 58 N.Y.2d 713, 458 N.Y.S.2d 909, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3923, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brooklyn-union-gas-co-v-state-board-of-equalization-assessment-ny-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack