Preview
(FILED: WASSAU_COUNTY CLERK 1273172015 09:36 AM
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NASSAU
In the matter of
JANE & LARRY NITZKY
Petitioner,
- against -
THE ASSESSOR and THE BOARD OF ASSESSMENT
REVIEW OF THE COUNTY OF NASSAU
Respondents.
INDEX NO. 405952/2015
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/31/2015
3598-N
Index No.:
PETITION
Section: 32
Block: 563
Lot(s): 1-2
The Petitioner above-named, by its attorneys, Forchelli,
Curto, Deegan, Schwartz, Mineo, Cohn & Terrana,
alleges as follows:
LLP, respectfully
1. At all times herein mentioned, Petitioner was and still is
an aggrieved party with respect to the assessment(s) described below
within the meaning of Section 706 of the Real Property Tax Law of the
State of New York, and the Assessor and the Board of Assessment Review
of the COUNTY OF NASSAU are the Respondents herein.
2. The Respondents have heretofore prepared, completed and
perfected, purportedly according to law, an assessment roll for the
COUNTY OF NASSAU for the tax year 2012/13 (taxable status date January
Ist, 2011), which assessment roll included an assessment for
Petitioner's real property described and assessed as set forth in the
following schedule:
Town: HEMPSTEAD Claimed
. Over-
S.D.: H16 Tentative Claimed Final valuation
Assessed Assessed Assessed and/or
(Dist.)/Sec. /Blk. /Lot Valuation Valuation Valuation Inequality
32/563/1-2
Land $1,329 $1,143
Total $1,457 $376 1,253 $8773. Petitioner has duly made and filed with Respondents a written
application and statement under oath, to have said assessed valuation(s)
of said real property corrected and revised, specifying therein the
respect to which the assessments(s) complained of was incorrect, and
which application and statement sought to reduce the assessment
complained of, as set forth in the above schedule. Said application and
statement are hereby referred to, made a part hereof and incorporated
4. Upon information and belief, a final decision and
determination on the application and statement were duly rendered by
Respondents, who failed to reduce the assessment(s) as requested, and
Respondents did confirm the assessed valuation(s) of Petitioner's
property, as set forth in the schedule above.
5. Thirty (30) days have not elapsed since the filing of the
certified copy of the completed and verified assessment roll or since
receipt by the Petitioner of a Hearing Officer's decision, or duly
executed stipulation, providing notice of, or providing for,
disqualification from review under the Small Claims Assessment Review
Program and the right to judicial review in accordance with Section 733
Subdivision 3 of the Real Property Tax Law.
6. The assessment(s) of Petitioner's property, as set forth in
the above schedule, is erroneous on the following grounds:
(a) The assessments(s) is excessive to the extent that it
exceeds the full value of the property; and to the extent that the real
property failed to receive all or a portion of a partial or full
exemption to which the real property or owner thereof is entitled
pursuant to the law authorizing the partial or full exemption; and
(b) The assessment(s) is unequal in that it is made at a
higher percentage of value than the assessed value of other real
property on the assessment roll; and in that the assessed value(s) has
been made at a higher proportionate value than the assessments of all
other real property on the assessment roll. The specified instances of
such unequal assessments(s) are the assessments of all other real
property in the COUNTY OF NASSAU and each and every parcel thereof.
(c) The property is misclassified in that the classdesignation on the assessment roll is incorrect.
(ad) The actual assessment and/or transition or taxable
assessment is excessive because (i) petitioner's property has failed to
receive all or a portion of the RPTL 485-b (business investment)
exemption or other partial exemptions to which it is entitled, or that
respondent has failed to properly calculate such exemptions; and (ii)
the respondent has failed to comply with the limitations placed on
assessment increases and the methods of assessment computation set forth
in RPTL 1805.
7. Petitioner is aggrieved and injured by said unequal,
excessive and erroneous assessment(s) and will be required to pay a
greater amount of proportionate taxes than Petitioner would be required
to pay if the assessments(s) had been correct and equal.
8. No provision is made by law for an appeal or other relief
from the final determination of the Respondents, except for review by
petition to the Supreme Court, and no previous application for the
relief herein sought has been made to any court or judge.
WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays that the Supreme Court review and
correct, on its merits, the final determination of Respondents on the
grounds set forth in this petition, and that the Court take evidence to
enable Petitioner to show the unequal, excessive and erroneous
assessment(s) of the real property, in order that the assessment(s) may
be reduced to the appropriate value thereof for land and improvements,
and to a valuation proportionate to the assessments of other real
property assessed on the same roll for the same year, so that the
equality of assessments will result and for such other and further
relief as the Court may deem just and proper, together with the costs
and disbursements of this proceeding.
Dated: Mineola, New York
April 19, 2012
Yours, etc.,Forchelli, Curto, Deegan,
Schwartz, Mineo, Cohn &
Attorneys for Petitioner
The Omni
333 Earle Ovington Boulevard
Suite 1010
Uniondale, New York 11553
(516) 248-1700SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NASSAU
---------------------------------------------- x
In the matter of
JANE & LARRY NITZKY,
Petitioner, NOTICE OF
PETITION and
- against - VERIFICATION
THE ASSESSOR and THE BOARD OF ASSESSMENT
REVIEW OF THE COUNTY OF NASSAU
Respondents.
eee x
TO THE REPONDENTS NAMED WITHIN:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT, upon the annexed verified
petition, an application will be made pursuant to the provisions
of the Real Property Tax Law, at a Special Term for Tax Certiorari
of this Court, to be held at the courthouse thereof, on the 19th
day of June, 2012, at 9:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as counsel
may be heard, for the relief prayed for in said petition upon the
grounds set forth herein, and for such other and further relief as
may be just and proper in the premises.
Dated: Mineola, New York
April 19, 2012
Yours, etc.,
Forchelli, Curto, Deegan,
Schwartz, Mineo, Cohn &
Attorneys for Petitioner
The Omni
333 Earle Ovington Boulevard
Suite 1010
Uniondale, New York 11553
(516) 248-1700VERIFICATION
STATE OF NEW YORK )
COUNTY OF NASSAU )
The undersigned, being duly sworn, deposes and
says: I am the agent for the Petitioner herein. I have read
the foregoing petition and know the contents thereof; the
same is true to my knowledge except as to matters therein
stated to be alleged upon information and belief, and to
those matters, I believe them to be true. The reason this
verification is made by the deponent, and not by Petitioner,
is that all material allegations of said petition, except
those as to matters of public record, are within my personal
knowledge.
Sworn to me this
19th day of April, 2012
% m *
DaCKUL lyre Thee ew syfer.
& [/ Notary Public
JACQUELINE HELKO!
ftatary Public, State of Now eet
outs
alii ‘sau Cot
Commission Expires May 3. 2g io
Preview
(FILED: WASSAU_COUNTY CLERK 1273172015 09:36 AM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NASSAU In the matter of JANE & LARRY NITZKY Petitioner, - against - THE ASSESSOR and THE BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW OF THE COUNTY OF NASSAU Respondents. INDEX NO. 405952/2015 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/31/2015 3598-N Index No.: PETITION Section: 32 Block: 563 Lot(s): 1-2 The Petitioner above-named, by its attorneys, Forchelli, Curto, Deegan, Schwartz, Mineo, Cohn & Terrana, alleges as follows: LLP, respectfully 1. At all times herein mentioned, Petitioner was and still is an aggrieved party with respect to the assessment(s) described below within the meaning of Section 706 of the Real Property Tax Law of the State of New York, and the Assessor and the Board of Assessment Review of the COUNTY OF NASSAU are the Respondents herein. 2. The Respondents have heretofore prepared, completed and perfected, purportedly according to law, an assessment roll for the COUNTY OF NASSAU for the tax year 2012/13 (taxable status date January Ist, 2011), which assessment roll included an assessment for Petitioner's real property described and assessed as set forth in the following schedule: Town: HEMPSTEAD Claimed . Over- S.D.: H16 Tentative Claimed Final valuation Assessed Assessed Assessed and/or (Dist.)/Sec. /Blk. /Lot Valuation Valuation Valuation Inequality 32/563/1-2 Land $1,329 $1,143 Total $1,457 $376 1,253 $8773. Petitioner has duly made and filed with Respondents a written application and statement under oath, to have said assessed valuation(s) of said real property corrected and revised, specifying therein the respect to which the assessments(s) complained of was incorrect, and which application and statement sought to reduce the assessment complained of, as set forth in the above schedule. Said application and statement are hereby referred to, made a part hereof and incorporated 4. Upon information and belief, a final decision and determination on the application and statement were duly rendered by Respondents, who failed to reduce the assessment(s) as requested, and Respondents did confirm the assessed valuation(s) of Petitioner's property, as set forth in the schedule above. 5. Thirty (30) days have not elapsed since the filing of the certified copy of the completed and verified assessment roll or since receipt by the Petitioner of a Hearing Officer's decision, or duly executed stipulation, providing notice of, or providing for, disqualification from review under the Small Claims Assessment Review Program and the right to judicial review in accordance with Section 733 Subdivision 3 of the Real Property Tax Law. 6. The assessment(s) of Petitioner's property, as set forth in the above schedule, is erroneous on the following grounds: (a) The assessments(s) is excessive to the extent that it exceeds the full value of the property; and to the extent that the real property failed to receive all or a portion of a partial or full exemption to which the real property or owner thereof is entitled pursuant to the law authorizing the partial or full exemption; and (b) The assessment(s) is unequal in that it is made at a higher percentage of value than the assessed value of other real property on the assessment roll; and in that the assessed value(s) has been made at a higher proportionate value than the assessments of all other real property on the assessment roll. The specified instances of such unequal assessments(s) are the assessments of all other real property in the COUNTY OF NASSAU and each and every parcel thereof. (c) The property is misclassified in that the classdesignation on the assessment roll is incorrect. (ad) The actual assessment and/or transition or taxable assessment is excessive because (i) petitioner's property has failed to receive all or a portion of the RPTL 485-b (business investment) exemption or other partial exemptions to which it is entitled, or that respondent has failed to properly calculate such exemptions; and (ii) the respondent has failed to comply with the limitations placed on assessment increases and the methods of assessment computation set forth in RPTL 1805. 7. Petitioner is aggrieved and injured by said unequal, excessive and erroneous assessment(s) and will be required to pay a greater amount of proportionate taxes than Petitioner would be required to pay if the assessments(s) had been correct and equal. 8. No provision is made by law for an appeal or other relief from the final determination of the Respondents, except for review by petition to the Supreme Court, and no previous application for the relief herein sought has been made to any court or judge. WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays that the Supreme Court review and correct, on its merits, the final determination of Respondents on the grounds set forth in this petition, and that the Court take evidence to enable Petitioner to show the unequal, excessive and erroneous assessment(s) of the real property, in order that the assessment(s) may be reduced to the appropriate value thereof for land and improvements, and to a valuation proportionate to the assessments of other real property assessed on the same roll for the same year, so that the equality of assessments will result and for such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper, together with the costs and disbursements of this proceeding. Dated: Mineola, New York April 19, 2012 Yours, etc.,Forchelli, Curto, Deegan, Schwartz, Mineo, Cohn & Attorneys for Petitioner The Omni 333 Earle Ovington Boulevard Suite 1010 Uniondale, New York 11553 (516) 248-1700SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NASSAU ---------------------------------------------- x In the matter of JANE & LARRY NITZKY, Petitioner, NOTICE OF PETITION and - against - VERIFICATION THE ASSESSOR and THE BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW OF THE COUNTY OF NASSAU Respondents. eee x TO THE REPONDENTS NAMED WITHIN: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT, upon the annexed verified petition, an application will be made pursuant to the provisions of the Real Property Tax Law, at a Special Term for Tax Certiorari of this Court, to be held at the courthouse thereof, on the 19th day of June, 2012, at 9:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard, for the relief prayed for in said petition upon the grounds set forth herein, and for such other and further relief as may be just and proper in the premises. Dated: Mineola, New York April 19, 2012 Yours, etc., Forchelli, Curto, Deegan, Schwartz, Mineo, Cohn & Attorneys for Petitioner The Omni 333 Earle Ovington Boulevard Suite 1010 Uniondale, New York 11553 (516) 248-1700VERIFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF NASSAU ) The undersigned, being duly sworn, deposes and says: I am the agent for the Petitioner herein. I have read the foregoing petition and know the contents thereof; the same is true to my knowledge except as to matters therein stated to be alleged upon information and belief, and to those matters, I believe them to be true. The reason this verification is made by the deponent, and not by Petitioner, is that all material allegations of said petition, except those as to matters of public record, are within my personal knowledge. Sworn to me this 19th day of April, 2012 % m * DaCKUL lyre Thee ew syfer. & [/ Notary Public JACQUELINE HELKO! ftatary Public, State of Now eet outs alii ‘sau Cot Commission Expires May 3. 2g io