People ex el. Smith v. Loening

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex el. Smith v. Loening

262 A.D. 913, 28 N.Y.S.2d 1010, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6455

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

DecidedJune 30, 1941

StatusPublished

This text of 262 A.D. 913 (People ex el. Smith v. Loening) 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

People ex el. Smith v. Loening, 262 A.D. 913, 28 N.Y.S.2d 1010, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6455 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Certiorari to review assessment on real property. Final order modified on the law and facts by substituting for the sum of $89,050 in the first decretal paragraph the sum of $162,500, and in place of the sum of $28,864 the sum of $21,125; and in the second decretal paragraph by substituting the sum of $700 in place of the stun of $1,287.60, and the sum of $87,500 in place of the sum of $160,950. As so modified, the final order is affirmed, without costs. Respondents’ proof was insufficient to overcome the well-established presumption of the correctness of the assessment. However, there is proof which warrants the conclusion that there was inequality in the assessment to the extent that respondents’ property should have been assessed at $162,500. Findings of fact and conclusions of law inconsistent herewith are reversed, and new findings of fact and conclusions of law in accordance herewith will be made. Lazansky, P. J., Johnston, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur; Carswell, J., dissents and votes to reverse the order and to dismiss the writ on the ground that the presumption in support of the assessors’ valuation was not overthrown by the respondents’ proof. Settle order on five days’ notice.

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

Certiorari to review assessment on real property. Final order modified on the law and facts by substituting for the sum of $89,050 in the first decretal paragraph the sum of $162,500, and in place of the sum of $28,864 the sum of $21,125; and in the second decretal paragraph by substituting the sum of $700 in place of the stun of $1,287.60, and the sum of $87,500 in place of the sum of $160,950. As so modified, the final order is affirmed, without costs. Respondents’ proof was insufficient to overcome the well-established presumption of the correctness of the assessment. However, there is proof which warrants the conclusion that there was inequality in the assessment to the extent that respondents’ property should have been assessed at $162,500. Findings of fact and conclusions of law inconsistent herewith are reversed, and new findings of fact and conclusions of law in accordance herewith will be made. Lazansky, P. J., Johnston, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur; Carswell, J., dissents and votes to reverse the order and to dismiss the writ on the ground that the presumption in support of the assessors’ valuation was not overthrown by the respondents’ proof. Settle order on five days’ notice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

262 A.D. 913, 28 N.Y.S.2d 1010, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6455, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-el-smith-v-loening-nyappdiv-1941.