Matter of Bi-Coastal Props., LLC v. Soliman

CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedApril 21, 2026
Docket33
StatusPublished

This text of Matter of Bi-Coastal Props., LLC v. Soliman (Matter of Bi-Coastal Props., LLC v. Soliman) 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
Matter of Bi-Coastal Props., LLC v. Soliman, (N.Y. 2026).

Opinion

Matter of Bi-Coastal Props., LLC v Soliman - 2026 NY Slip Op 02366

skip to main content

It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.

Law Reporting
Bureau
Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter

Court Decisions Resources About

Matter of Bi-Coastal Props., LLC v Soliman

2026 NY Slip Op 02366

April 21, 2026

Court of Appeals

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

In the Matter of Bi-Coastal Properties, LLC, Appellant,

v

Sherif Soliman, & c. et al., Respondents.

Decided on April 21, 2026

No. 33

Todd Kammerman, for appellant.

Andrea M. Chan, for respondents.

[*1]

MEMORANDUM:

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question not answered as unnecessary.

In this CPLR article 78 proceeding, Supreme Court granted judgment to petitioner

to the extent of annulling respondents' determination denying petitioner's clerical error review application. The court also denied respondents' cross-motion to dismiss the petition. It concluded that, under Administrative Code of City of NY § 11-243 and 19 RCNY former 53-02, petitioner's property was entitled to receive J-51 tax exemption benefits beginning July 1, 2020. The Appellate Division reversed on the law. We agree with the Appellate Division that, here, petitioner's application challenging the alleged overassessment of its property—resulting from the failure to apply an increase in the physical value of the property and an exemption following certain window replacement work—was reviewable exclusively under RPTL article 7.

Order affirmed, with costs, and certified question not answered as unnecessary, in a memorandum. Chief Judge Wilson and Judges Rivera, Garcia, Singas, Cannataro, Troutman and Halligan concur.

Decided April 21, 2026

Court Decisions

All Court Decisions Official Reports Service Bound Volumes Decision Search

Resources

RSS Feeds Style Manual Citation Tools Opinion Formatting & Privacy Guidelines Opinion Selection Criteria Legal Research Portal Site Index

About

About the Law Reporting Bureau About our Operations Contact Us Twitter

Quick Contact Info

17 Lodge Street

Albany, NY 12207

Phone: (518) 453-6900

Links to or from other sites do not signify endorsement or relationship with them.

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