People Ex Rel. Simpson v. . Wells

73 N.E. 1025, 181 N.Y. 252, 19 Bedell 252, 1905 N.Y. LEXIS 732
New York Court of Appeals·Decided April 18, 1905·Published·Cited by 27 cases

Opinion

Vann, J.

The relator is the lessee of three parcels of land in the city of New York and is under covenant with the lessor to pay all taxes and assessments levied thereon during the term. On the second Monday of January, 1903, these par *254 cels were respectively assessed at the sums of $70,000, $35,000 and $32,000, which, on the 25tll of March following, were increased by the respondents to $105,000, $40,000 and $35,000. The tax cotnmissioners claim that they were authorized to make this increase by section 896 of the city charter, which is as follows:

“ The board of taxes and assessments may increase at any time before the first of April in each year, or may diminish at any time before the closing of the books of ‘annual record’ on the first day of April in each year, the assessed valuation of any real or personal estate of any individual or corporation, as in its judgment may be just or necessary for the equalization of taxation; but it shall not increase such valuations'of the property of any individual or corporation after said books are opened for correction and review, except upon notice given to the individual or corporation affected by such increase at least ten days before the fifteenth day of April in each year.” (L. 1901, oh. 466.)

The relator does not claim that the assessment is unequal or unjust, or that he or his lessor had no notice of the increase when it was proposed, or that they had no opportunity to be heard before it was made permanent. He insists, however, that said section is unconstitutional and, hence, that notice to him, even if given in time for a hearing, is immaterial, because no authority to increase the assessment can be conferred by a statute passed in violation of the Constitution. He founds his contention not upon what was done in this case, but upon what he claims might be done in any case. His argument, in substance, is that according to the statute, the books of annual record are opened for examination on the second Monday of January and closed on the first of April; that said section authorizes an increase at any time after the books are opened and before they are closed, but forbids an increase without notice to the person interested at least ten days before the fifteenth of April; that a notice served after the first and before the fifteenth of April would be practically no notice, because too late for a hearing before the books are closed and *255 that an increase of valuation without notice would deprive the taxpayer of property without due process of law. He also-claims that the statute is defective because it does not provide for a hearing as matter of right and that a hearing by favor only does not satisfy the Constitution.

Section 896 should be read in connection with other sections relating to the method of assessment and especially sections 892 and 895. Section 892 provides that assessment books shall be kept in which shall be entered in detail the assessed valuations of real and personal estate within the limits of,the several boroughs of the city of Hew York; that they shall be open for public inspection, examination and correction from the second Monday in January until the first day of April in each year, and that on the last-mentioned day they shall be closed to enable the board of taxes and assessments to prepare assessment rolls of the several boroughs for delivery to the board of aldermen. Previous to and during the time the books are open for inspection, the board is required to advertise the fact in one newspaper named in the act and in such others as may be authorized by the board of city record.

Section 895 provides that during the time the books are open for public inspection any person claiming to be aggrieved may make a complaint and ask to'have the valuation of his property corrected. The commissioners, during the months of April and May, may act upon the complaints made on or before the 31st of March, and may take testimony and make corrections during those months, notwithstanding the provision that the books are to be closed on the first of April. Hence the closing of the books on the first of April is not absolute in all cases, for corrections may be made under certain circumstances at any time during the two months immediately following.

According to the system provided by the charter, as we read it, a valuation is to be made of all property by the second Monday of January, when the books are opened for public inspection, and any person interested may enter a complaint. Such complaint may be investigated and decided before the. first of April, in which event the books are closed *256 on that day as to the property affected. The complaint, however, may be investigated and decided after the first of April and prior to the first of June, in which event the books are not closed on the first of April as to the property covered by the complaint.

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

People Ex Rel. Simpson v. . Wells, 73 N.E. 1025, 181 N.Y. 252, 19 Bedell 252, 1905 N.Y. LEXIS 732 (N.Y. 1905).

73 N.E. 1025 (People Ex Rel. Simpson v. . Wells) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Tolia
214 A.D.2d 57 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
Schulz v. State
156 Misc. 2d 169 (New York Supreme Court, 1993)
People v. Biltsted
150 Misc. 2d 872 (Criminal Court of the City of New York, 1991)
People v. Cody
147 Misc. 2d 588 (Rochester City Court, 1990)
People v. Dietze
549 N.E.2d 1166 (New York Court of Appeals, 1989)
Brown-Forman Distillers Corp. v. State Liquor Authority
479 N.E.2d 764 (New York Court of Appeals, 1985)
Glass v. Thompson
75 Misc. 2d 824 (New York Supreme Court, 1973)
In re the Second Report of the November, 1968 Grand Jury
257 N.E.2d 859 (New York Court of Appeals, 1970)
Town of Peru v. State
59 Misc. 2d 49 (New York State Court of Claims, 1969)
State v. Hudson County News Co.
173 A.2d 20 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1961)
People v. Finkelstein
174 N.E.2d 470 (New York Court of Appeals, 1961)
L'Hommedieu v. Board of Regents of the University
276 A.D.2d 494 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1950)
Thompson v. Wallin
276 A.D.2d 463 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1950)
Kaplan v. Antonelli
132 Misc. 572 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1928)
People v. American Socialist Society
202 A.D. 640 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1922)
In re Blaine's Estate
6 Alaska 553 (D. Alaska, 1922)
People ex rel. Tishman & Son v. Cantor
109 Misc. 495 (New York Supreme Court, 1919)
Matter of Simmons (Catskill Aqueduct)
100 N.E. 455 (New York Court of Appeals, 1912)
Hanrahan v. . Terminal Station Commission
100 N.E. 414 (New York Court of Appeals, 1912)
State v. Standard Oil Co.
123 P. 40 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1912)