White Plains Properties Corp. v. Tax Assessor of the City of White Plains

58 A.D.2d 653, 396 N.Y.S.2d 68, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12740
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 27, 1977
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 58 A.D.2d 653 (White Plains Properties Corp. v. Tax Assessor of the City of White Plains) 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
White Plains Properties Corp. v. Tax Assessor of the City of White Plains, 58 A.D.2d 653, 396 N.Y.S.2d 68, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12740 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Opinion

— In two consolidated proceedings pursuant to article 7 of the Real Property Tax Law, the appeals are from two orders of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, one as to each consolidated proceeding, both dated November 16, 1976, which denied the motions of appellants to strike the proceedings from the calendar for failure to comply with section 678.3 of the rules of this court (22 NYCRR 678.3). Orders affirmed, with one bill of $50 costs and disbursements to cover both appeals.

[654]*654Section 678.3 of the rules of this court provides, in part; that a tax assessment review proceeding shall not be added to any tax certiorari calendar unless the note of issue contains a statement as to whether the property involved is income producing. Petitioners-respondents own and operate the subject property, upon which is a Macy’s department store. Petitioners, in filing the note of issue for the instant proceedings, stated that the subject property was not income producing. Appellants moved, pursuant to section 678.3, to strike the proceedings from the calendar on the grounds that the subject property is income producing and that no statement of the income and expenses of the property was submitted as required by subdivision (b) of the said section. The section in question was enacted to expedite tax review proceedings. It did not change the existing law that the language "income producing” applies only to income produced directly by the real estate, and not to income generated by a commercial business conducted thereon. Hopkins, J. P., Shapiro, Hawkins and Suozzi, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Hempstead Country Club v. Board of Assessors
112 A.D.3d 123 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Al Turi Landfill, Inc. v. Town of Goshen
93 A.D.3d 786 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Miriam Osborn Memorial Home Ass'n v. Assessor of City of Rye
80 A.D.3d 118 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Ardsley Country Club v. Assessor of Greenburgh
24 Misc. 3d 1118 (New York Supreme Court, 2009)
Norton Co. v. Assessor of Watervliet
292 A.D.2d 672 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Atlantic Refining & Marketing Corp. v. Assessor of Ithaca
246 A.D.2d 875 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. v. Town of Rye
131 A.D.2d 568 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
58 A.D.2d 653, 396 N.Y.S.2d 68, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12740, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/white-plains-properties-corp-v-tax-assessor-of-the-city-of-white-plains-nyappdiv-1977.