Stevens Medical Arts Building v. City of Mount Vernon

72 A.D.2d 177, 424 N.Y.S.2d 230, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9665
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 21, 1980
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 72 A.D.2d 177 (Stevens Medical Arts Building v. City of Mount Vernon) 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
Stevens Medical Arts Building v. City of Mount Vernon, 72 A.D.2d 177, 424 N.Y.S.2d 230, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9665 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Hopkins, J.

The question before us is the timeliness of these proceedings. The appellant city and its officers claim that under the provisions of the Real Property Tax Law the proceedings must be instituted within 30 days after August 2, 1978, when the city gave notice that the assessment roll had been filed. Since incontestably these proceedings were instituted on September 20, 1978, the city contends that they are time-barred.

Special Term denied appellants’ motions to dismiss based on this ground, holding that under the provisions of the city charter, read in conjunction with the provisions of the Real Property Tax Law, the proceedings were timely brought, since the last day for filing the assessment roll under the charter was August 31, and that date controlled for the measurement of the 30 days’ limitation provided by subdivision 2 of section 702 of the Real Property Tax Law.

We affirm. The provisions of the Real Property Tax Law must be read in the light of the provisions of the city charter, and the proceedings were therefore timely instituted within the 30-day limitation.

I

Each of the petitioners is an owner of taxable real property in the City of Mount Vernon. On August 2, 1978 the Commissioner of Assessment and Taxation filed a certified copy of the 1978 assessment roll in the office of the City Clerk. Notice of the completion and filing of the assessment roll was given on August 2, 1978.

On September 20, 1978 each of the petitioners served a petition to review the assessments (see Real Property Tax Law, § 700), alleging that the assessments were unequal, illegal and represented more than the full value of the properties.

[179]*179Thereafter the appellants moved to dismiss each of the proceedings on the grounds that it had not been timely begun and did not comply with subdivision 3 of section 307 of the Real Property Tax Law. Special Term denied the motions, holding that the proceedings had been commenced within the 30-day limitation prescribed by section 702 of the Real Property Tax Law. Special Term reached that conclusion, although acknowledging that service of the petitions occurred more than 30 days after August 2, 1978. It reasoned that the proceedings were timely because section 235 of the City Charter provides that the last day for filing the assessment roll is August 31, and subdivision 2 of section 702 of the Real Property Tax Law provides that the assessment roll cannot be considered finally completed and filed until the last day set by law for the filing of the assessment roll or until notice thereof has been given as required by law, whichever is later. Hence, the service of the petitions was timely, since it occurred within 30 days of August 31, 1978.

The appellants then moved for leave to reargue. Special Term denied the motion.

On this appeal the appellants argue that Special Term mistakenly construed the statutes, contending that the City Charter should not be applied to alter the provisions of subdivision 1 of section 516 of the Real Property Tax Law, calling for the filing of the assessment roll on August 1. The interpretation of the statutes by Special Term, say the appellants, defeats the intent of the Legislature to prescribe a readily ascertainable date for the commencement of proceedings to review assessments.

II

Our initial inquiry must be directed to the statutes. Article 5 of the Real Property Tax Law deals generally with the procedure to be followed for the preparation and filing of assessments. Subdivision 1 of section 516 of the Real Property Tax Law provides, in part, as follows: "§ 516. Filing of completed assessment roll; notice thereof.

"1. On or before the first day of August, the assessors shall finally complete the assessment roll and prepare and file a certified copy thereof in the office of the city or town clerk. The assessors shall forthwith cause a notice to be published once in the official newspaper of such city or town, or if no [180]*180newspaper has been designated the official newspaper, in a newspaper having general circulation in such city or town, stating that the assessment roll has been finally completed and a certified copy thereof so filed for public inspection.”

Article 7 of the Real Property Tax Law provides generally for the judicial review of assessments. Section 700 of the Real Property Tax Law reads in part as follows:

"§ 700. Proceeding to review an assessment of real property; preference.
"1. A proceeding to review an assessment of real property shall be brought as provided in this article unless otherwise provided by law. * * *
"2. All rights, remedies and practices heretofore applicable to a proceeding commenced by a writ of certiorari which are not inconsistent with the provisions of this article shall apply to a proceeding to review an assessment of real property under this article.”

Section 702 of the Real Property Tax Law, as recently amended (L 1977, ch 620), reads, in part, as follows:

"§ 702. Place where and time within which proceeding to be brought.
"1. A proceeding to review an assessment of real property under this article shall be brought at a special term of the supreme court in the judicial district in which the assessment to be reviewed was made.
"2. Such a proceeding shall be commenced within thirty days after the final completion and filing of the assessment roll containing such assessment. For the purpose of this section an assessment roll shall not be considered finally completed and filed until the last day set by law for the filing of such assessment roll or until notice thereof has been given as required by law, whichever is later.”

Finally, section 2006 of the Real Property Tax Law (added by L 1958, ch 959) reads as follows:

"§ 2006. Exceptions.
"This chapter shall not be deemed to repeal or otherwise affect the provisions of any special or local law or ordinance or of any county, city or village charter, or other special form of government, it being the intention of the legislature that the same shall continue in full force and effect until and unless otherwise duly amended, repealed or affected.”

We turn now to the provisions of the City Charter. Section [181]*181235 provides, in part, as follows: "When the tentative assessment roll has been revised as herein provided the amounts of the assessments as revised as aforesaid shall be duly added and the totals stated, and the commissioner shall verify all three copies as required by the provisions of the tax law and shall duly certify the same to be the general assessment roll of the year in which it is so certified. The commissioner shall thereupon and before the first day of September in each year, file one copy of the said general assessment roll in the office of the city clerk there to remain for fifteen days for public inspection and shall forthwith deliver another copy thereof to the clerk of the board of supervisors of Westchester county, and file the third copy thereof with the comptroller for the purpose of apportioning and extending the taxes of the following year thereon as herein provided.

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

Related

Matter of Parkway Elderly Hous. Dev. Fund Co., Inc. v. Assessor of City of Corning
2021 NY Slip Op 04829 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Friendly Ice Cream Corp. v. Tompkins County
159 Misc. 2d 779 (New York Supreme Court, 1993)
Coliseum Towers Associates v. Livingston
153 A.D.2d 683 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
Josephine Weigner v. The City of New York
852 F.2d 646 (Second Circuit, 1988)
Rollins v. Hess
140 Misc. 2d 591 (New York Supreme Court, 1988)
McCann v. Scaduto
519 N.E.2d 309 (New York Court of Appeals, 1987)
McCann v. Scaduto
123 A.D.2d 111 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1986)
Socci v. Stone
120 A.D.2d 531 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1986)
County of Rensselaer v. City of Troy
102 A.D.2d 976 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)
Sussman v. Hendrickson
123 Misc. 2d 949 (New York Supreme Court, 1984)
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Wernick
90 A.D.2d 519 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)
Durante v. Evans
116 Misc. 2d 814 (New York Supreme Court, 1982)
Stabile v. Half Hollow Hills Central School District
83 A.D.2d 945 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1981)
W. T. Grant Co. v. Srogi
420 N.E.2d 953 (New York Court of Appeals, 1981)
Porto v. Rubino
73 A.D.2d 951 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1980)
Ward Leonard Electric Co. v. Rubino
73 A.D.2d 952 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
72 A.D.2d 177, 424 N.Y.S.2d 230, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9665, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stevens-medical-arts-building-v-city-of-mount-vernon-nyappdiv-1980.