From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Net Realty Inv. Trust v. Board of Assessors

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 21, 1989
153 A.D.2d 674 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Opinion

August 21, 1989

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McGinity, J.).


Ordered that the cross appeal of Valley Stream Union Free School District No. 13 is dismissed as abandoned, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,

Ordered that the order and judgment is reversed insofar as appealed from by the plaintiffs and cross-appealed from by the remaining school districts, on the law, without costs or disbursements, it is declared that those school districts are not liable for tax refunds, and the complaint is dismissed insofar as it is asserted against them; and it is further,

Ordered that the action against the defendants Board of Assessors of the County of Nassau and County of Nassau is severed and their time to serve an answer to the amended complaint is extended until 30 days after service upon them of a copy of this decision and order, with notice of entry.

The factual and procedural history of this case is described in this court's decision in Corporate Prop. Investors v. Board of Assessors ( 153 A.D.2d 656 [decided herewith]).

Nassau County Administrative Code § 6-26.0 (b) (3) (c) (L 1948, ch 851, § 2) relieves school districts from liability for the tax refunds in question (see, Corporate Prop. Investors v. Board of Assessors, supra; see also, Vantage Petroleum v. Board of Assessment Review, 91 A.D.2d 1037, 1038-1039, affd 61 N.Y.2d 695, citing Matter of Sperry Rand Corp. v. Board of Assessors, 77 A.D.2d 822). Therefore, the plaintiffs do not have a cause of action for refunds against the school districts.

In view of the fact that the plaintiffs herein commenced a declaratory judgment action challenging the assessments in question in December 1983, we find that they sufficiently protested tax payments made subsequent thereto and while the action was still pending (see, Corporate Prop. Investors v. Board of Assessors, supra). However, we cannot grant summary judgment on the issue of refund liability against the county defendants since there has not been joinder of issue with respect to those defendants (see, Corporate Prop. Investors v. Board of Assessors, supra). In light of this determination, we do not consider the effect of Laws of 1989 (ch 702) on the county defendants' liability, if any.

We have examined the parties' remaining contentions and find that those contentions are either without merit or need not be addressed in light of our determination. Lawrence, J.P., Rubin, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Net Realty Inv. Trust v. Board of Assessors

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 21, 1989
153 A.D.2d 674 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
Case details for

Net Realty Inv. Trust v. Board of Assessors

Case Details

Full title:NET REALTY INVESTMENT TRUST et al., Appellants-Respondents, v. BOARD OF…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Aug 21, 1989

Citations

153 A.D.2d 674 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Citing Cases

R & G Brenner Income Tax Consultants v. Gilmartin

ents (seeKimso Apts., LLC v. Gandhi, 24 N.Y.3d at 412, 998 N.Y.S.2d 740, 23 N.E.3d 1008 ; 39 Coll. Point…