Trustees of Columbia University v. Town of Orangetown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Trustees of Columbia University v. Town of Orangetown

60 A.D.2d 582, 399 N.Y.S.2d 708, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14528

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

DecidedDecember 5, 1977

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 60 A.D.2d 582 (Trustees of Columbia University v. Town of Orangetown) 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

Trustees of Columbia University v. Town of Orangetown, 60 A.D.2d 582, 399 N.Y.S.2d 708, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14528 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to compel appellants to place certain real property owned by petitioner upon the tax exempt assessment roll, the appeals are (1) from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated December 3, 1976, which, inter alia, granted petitioner’s motion for summary judgment and denied appellants’ cross motion for summary judgment and (2) as limited by appellants’ brief, from so much of an order of the same court, dated February 14, 1977, as, upon treating their motion to reargue as a motion to renew, denied the said motion. Order and judgment (one paper) affirmed, and order affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of $50 costs and disbursements to cover both appeals. We concur with Special Term’s reasoning as to the nature of Columbia University’s educational mission and the role of basic scientific research. Clearly, the scientific research activities being conducted at the university’s Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory, a postgraduate institute specializing in the study of the earth, its origin, history and relation to the universe, are an integral part of the educational program and are fully in accord with the educational purposes for which the university was organized (cf. Matter of Explorers Club v Lewisohn, 34 NY2d 143 [incidental educational activities of an organization chartered primarily for scientific, not educational, purposes]). Hence, the university is entitled to an exemption for the subject property pursuant to section 421 (subd 1, par [a]) of the Real Property Tax Law ("Non-profit organizations”). The issue of alleged nonexempt vacant land is not properly a part of this proceeding or ripe for judicial determination; appellants’ motion to renew was therefore properly denied. Cohalan, J. P., Margett, Damiani and Shapiro, 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, inter alia, to compel appellants to place certain real property owned by petitioner upon the tax exempt assessment roll, the appeals are (1) from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated December 3, 1976, which, inter alia, granted petitioner’s motion for summary judgment and denied appellants’ cross motion for summary judgment and (2) as limited by appellants’ brief, from so much of an order of the same court, dated February 14, 1977, as, upon treating their motion to reargue as a motion to renew, denied the said motion. Order and judgment (one paper) affirmed, and order affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of $50 costs and disbursements to cover both appeals. We concur with Special Term’s reasoning as to the nature of Columbia University’s educational mission and the role of basic scientific research. Clearly, the scientific research activities being conducted at the university’s Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory, a postgraduate institute specializing in the study of the earth, its origin, history and relation to the universe, are an integral part of the educational program and are fully in accord with the educational purposes for which the university was organized (cf. Matter of Explorers Club v Lewisohn, 34 NY2d 143 [incidental educational activities of an organization chartered primarily for scientific, not educational, purposes]). Hence, the university is entitled to an exemption for the subject property pursuant to section 421 (subd 1, par [a]) of the Real Property Tax Law ("Non-profit organizations”). The issue of alleged nonexempt vacant land is not properly a part of this proceeding or ripe for judicial determination; appellants’ motion to renew was therefore properly denied. Cohalan, J. P., Margett, Damiani and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 A.D.2d 582, 399 N.Y.S.2d 708, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14528, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trustees-of-columbia-university-v-town-of-orangetown-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack