People ex rel. Hoesterey v. Taylor

• Citation: 239 N.Y. 626,147 N.E. 223
• Parties: PEOPLE ex rel. HOESTEREY v. TAYLOR et al.
• Decision Date: 03 February 1925
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

239 N.Y. 626

147 N.E. 223

PEOPLE ex rel. HOESTEREY

v.TAYLOR et al.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Feb. 3, 1925.

Certiorari by the People of the State of New York, on the relation of Julius Hoesterey, Jr., against George S. Taylor and others, as Assessors of the City of Rochester, N. Y., in which the University of Rochester was interpleaded. From an order of the Appellate Division (210 App. Div. 196, 205 N. Y. S. 897), reversing an order of the Special Term (121 Misc. Rep. 718, 202 N. Y. S. 7), vacating a certiorari order to review action of Assessors of Rochester in exempting property of University, and dismissing the proceeding, defendants appeal, on certification by Appellate Division of questions of law (-- App. Div. --, 206 N. Y. S. 948). Order of Appellate Division reversed, and that of Special Term affirmed.

Appeal from order reversing as matter of law and not in the exercise of discretion an order of Special Term which granted defendants' motion to vacate an order of certiorari to review the action of the assessors of the city of Rochester in exempting from assessment, for the purpose of taxation, property of University of Rochester known as the Eastman School of Music. The Appellate Division certified as questions of law the following:

1. Upon the facts appearing in the petition herein, is the relator entitled to a certiorari order to review the action of the assessors of the city of Rochester in exempting from assessment the property described in the petition?

2. Are the legal questions which will arise upon a hearing upon the merits, relative to the exemption of the property described in the petition, of such public interest that they should be determined even though the court might not be able to grant specific relief by correction of the assessment roll?

Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

Clarence M. Platt, Corp. Counsel, of Rochester (Clarence P. Moser and Walter S. Hubbell, of counsel), both of Rochester), for appellants.

James L. Brewer, of Rochester, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

[1] Upon the facts appearing in the petition herein the relator was not entitled to a certiorari order to review the action of the assessors of the city of Rochester in exempting from assessment the property described in the petition, if, for no other reason, because the assessment rolls had passed out of the custody and control of the assessors at the time the certiorari order was granted. The court was then...