JB Park Place Realty, LLC v. Village of Bronxville

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

JB Park Place Realty, LLC v. Village of Bronxville

50 A.D.3d 689, 854 N.Y.S.2d 547

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

DecidedApril 1, 2008

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 50 A.D.3d 689 (JB Park Place Realty, LLC v. Village of Bronxville) 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

JB Park Place Realty, LLC v. Village of Bronxville, 50 A.D.3d 689, 854 N.Y.S.2d 547 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to Real Property Tax Law article 7 to review a real property tax assessment, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Dickerson, J.), entered November 8, 2006, which granted the petitioner’s motion for summary judgment reducing the 2006 assessment value from the sum of $72,000 to the sum of $45,448.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The petitioner established its entitlement to summary judgment by showing that the recent sale price of the property was the best evidence of the value of the property (see Matter of FMC Corp. [Peroxygen Chems. Div.] v Unmack, 92 NY2d 179, 189 [1998]; Plaza Hotel Assoc. v Wellington Assoc., 37 NY2d 273, 277 [1975]; Matter of Reckson Operating Partnership v Assessor of Town of Greenburgh, 289 AD2d 248, 249 [2001]). In opposition, the appellants failed to raise a triable issue of fact. They also did not provide an evidentiary basis for their contention that discovery or the pre-trial procedures outlined in 22 NYCRR 202.59 may lead to relevant evidence sufficient to raise an issue of fact (see Panasuk v Viola Park Realty, LLC, 41 AD3d 804, 805 [2007]; Lambert v Braceo, 18 AD3d 619, 620 [2005]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the petitioner’s motion for summary judgment. Spolzino, J.P., Ritter, Santucci and Garni, JJ., concur. [See 13 Misc 3d 1233(A), 2006 NY Slip Op 52106(11).]

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

In a proceeding pursuant to Real Property Tax Law article 7 to review a real property tax assessment, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Dickerson, J.), entered November 8, 2006, which granted the petitioner’s motion for summary judgment reducing the 2006 assessment value from the sum of $72,000 to the sum of $45,448.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The petitioner established its entitlement to summary judgment by showing that the recent sale price of the property was the best evidence of the value of the property (see Matter of FMC Corp. [Peroxygen Chems. Div.] v Unmack, 92 NY2d 179, 189 [1998]; Plaza Hotel Assoc. v Wellington Assoc., 37 NY2d 273, 277 [1975]; Matter of Reckson Operating Partnership v Assessor of Town of Greenburgh, 289 AD2d 248, 249 [2001]). In opposition, the appellants failed to raise a triable issue of fact. They also did not provide an evidentiary basis for their contention that discovery or the pre-trial procedures outlined in 22 NYCRR 202.59 may lead to relevant evidence sufficient to raise an issue of fact (see Panasuk v Viola Park Realty, LLC, 41 AD3d 804, 805 [2007]; Lambert v Braceo, 18 AD3d 619, 620 [2005]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the petitioner’s motion for summary judgment. Spolzino, J.P., Ritter, Santucci and Garni, JJ., concur. [See 13 Misc 3d 1233(A), 2006 NY Slip Op 52106(11).]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.3d 689, 854 N.Y.S.2d 547, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jb-park-place-realty-llc-v-village-of-bronxville-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack