Town of Greenburgh v. New York State Board of Equalization & Assessment

228 A.D.2d 446, 643 N.Y.2d 409, 643 N.Y.S.2d 409, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6223
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 3, 1996·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

The petitioner failed to demonstrate that the methodology for computing its equalization rate was not rational and that [447]*447the equalization rate was not supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Town of Greenburgh v New York State Bd. of Equalization & Assessment, 226 AD2d 546; Matter of Town of Harrison v New York State Bd. of Equalization & Assessment, 226 AD2d 548; Incorporated Vil. of Lynbrook v New York State Bd. of Equalization & Assessment, 209 AD2d 765, 766; Matter of City of White Plains v New York State Bd. of Equalization & Assessment, 205 AD2d 771, 772; Matter of Town of Patterson v State Bd. of Equalization & Assessment, 168 AD2d 820, 821). Ritter, J. P., Pizzuto, Santucci and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

Town of Greenburgh v. New York State Board of Equalization & Assessment, 228 A.D.2d 446, 643 N.Y.2d 409, 643 N.Y.S.2d 409, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6223 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

228 A.D.2d 446 (Town of Greenburgh v. New York State Board of Equalization & Assessment) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Town of Cortlandt v. New York State Board of Real Property Services
288 A.D.2d 388 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
City of White Plains v. New York State Board of Real Property Services
262 A.D.2d 638 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)