Mundinger v. Assessor of City of Rye
| Decision Date | 16 November 1992 |
| Citation | 590 N.Y.S.2d 122,187 A.D.2d 594 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Paul MUNDINGER, et al., Respondents, v. ASSESSOR OF the CITY OF RYE, et al., Appellants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Richard M. Gardella, Corp. Counsel, Rye, for appellants.
Griffin, Letsen, Coogan & Veneruso, P.C., Bronxville (James M. Coogan and Robert W. Wolper, on the brief), for respondents.
Before SULLIVAN, J.P., and ROSENBLATT, MILLER and RITTER, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In consolidated proceedings pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to compel the appellants to roll back the 1988 tax assessment on the petitioners' property, the appeal, by permission, is from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Silverman, J.), entered August 24, 1990, which (1) granted the petitioners' motion for disclosure, and (2) denied the appellants' cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the petition.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The petitioners are owners of waterfront real estate in the City of Rye. In 1988, the petitioners received a letter from the respondent Assessor of the City of Rye informing them that, due to the rapid rate of appreciation of property such as theirs, 150 waterfront parcels (including theirs) had been reassessed over the previous two years. The petitioners commenced this proceeding seeking, inter alia, to have the reassessments rolled back, claiming that the practice of "selective reassessment" had discriminated against waterfront property in favor of nonwaterfront property, and denied them equal protection under the law.
After the Supreme Court denied a motion by the appellants to dismiss the proceeding and a cross motion by the petitioners for summary judgment, the petitioners moved pursuant to CPLR 408 for leave to conduct a deposition of the Assessor. The appellants cross-moved for summary judgment. The Supreme Court granted the petitioners' motion to the extent of allowing the service of interrogatories on the Assessor, and denied the appellants' cross motion for summary judgment.
It is well settled that a system of selective reassessment that has no rational basis in law violates the equal protection provisions of the constitutions of the United States and the State of New York (see, Allegheny Pittsburgh Coal Co. v. Webster County Comm., 488 U.S. 336, 109 S.Ct. 633, 102 L.Ed.2d 688; Matter of Krugman v. Board of Assessors of Vil. of Atl. Beach, 141 A.D.2d 175, 533 N.Y.S.2d 495; cf., ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jacobowitz v. Bd. of Assessors for Town of Cornwall
...v. Board of Assessors &/or Assessor of Town/Vil. of Harrison, 69 A.D.3d 949, 950, 893 N.Y.S.2d 267;Matter of Mundinger v. Assessor of City of Rye, 187 A.D.2d 594, 595, 590 N.Y.S.2d 122). “[A] locality's tax assessment is presumptively valid [,but] a petitioner may overcome that presumption ......
-
Scarsdale Comm. for Fair Assessments v. Albanese
...(see Matter of Level 3 Communications, LLC v. DeBellis, 72 A.D.3d 164, 173–174, 895 N.Y.S.2d 110 ; Matter of Mundinger v. Assessor of City of Rye, 187 A.D.2d 594, 595, 590 N.Y.S.2d 122 ; cf. Matter of Board of Mgrs. of Greens of N. Hills Condominium v. Board of Assessors of County of Nassau......
-
Leone Properties, LLC v. Bd. of Assessors for Town of Cornwall
...of Assessors and/or Assessor of Town/Vil. of Harrison, 69 A.D.3d 949, 950, 893 N.Y.S.2d 267, quoting Matter of Mundinger v. Assessor of City of Rye, 187 A.D.2d 594, 595, 590 N.Y.S.2d 122). "Nevertheless, reassessment upon improvementis not illegal in and of itself ... [n]or is the use of th......
-
City of Rome v. Bd. of Assessors
...(see Nash v. Assessor of Town of Southampton, 168 A.D.2d 102, 105–109, 571 N.Y.S.2d 951 ; see also Matter of Mundinger v. Assessor of City of Rye, 187 A.D.2d 594, 595, 590 N.Y.S.2d 122 ; Parisi v. Assessor of Town of Southampton, 14 Misc.3d 1220[A], *5, 2007 WL 172019 ). It is the rule in a......