Shlomo v. Eristoff

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Shlomo v. Eristoff

286 A.D.2d 683, 729 N.Y.S.2d 909, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8442

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

DecidedSeptember 10, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 286 A.D.2d 683 (Shlomo v. Eristoff) 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

Shlomo v. Eristoff, 286 A.D.2d 683, 729 N.Y.S.2d 909, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8442 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent City of New York Office of the Comptroller, dated June 1, 1999, which denied the petitioner’s request to cancel its real estate tax debt, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Arniotes, J.), dated May 9, 2000, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs. .

The record supports the Supreme Court’s determination that the petitioner was not entitled to a partial tax exemption and was not entitled to a cancellation of the retroactive tax assessment imposed (see, RPTL 420-a [1] [a]; Matter of Hassberg v Tax Commn., 36 NY2d 817; cf., Quaglia v Incorporated Vil. of Munsey Park, 54 AD2d 434, affd 44 NY2d 772). O’Brien, J. P., Altman, Feuerstein and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent City of New York Office of the Comptroller, dated June 1, 1999, which denied the petitioner’s request to cancel its real estate tax debt, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Arniotes, J.), dated May 9, 2000, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs. .

The record supports the Supreme Court’s determination that the petitioner was not entitled to a partial tax exemption and was not entitled to a cancellation of the retroactive tax assessment imposed (see, RPTL 420-a [1] [a]; Matter of Hassberg v Tax Commn., 36 NY2d 817; cf., Quaglia v Incorporated Vil. of Munsey Park, 54 AD2d 434, affd 44 NY2d 772). O’Brien, J. P., Altman, Feuerstein and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

286 A.D.2d 683, 729 N.Y.S.2d 909, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8442, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shlomo-v-eristoff-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack